Full text of "University teaching methods"

See other formats

UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMITTEE

Report of the Committee on

University
Teaching Methods

LONDON

HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE
1964

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

COMMITTEE ON UNIVERSITY TEACHING METHODS

Sir Edward Hale, K.B.E., C.B., LL.D., M.A. (Chairman)

R. G. D, Allen, C.B.E., M.A., D.Sc.(Econ.), F.B.A.

(Professor of Statistics, London School of Economics, University of
London)

D. G. Christopherson, O.B.E., D.Phil., F.R.S., M.LMech.E.

(Warden, Durham Colleges, and Vice-Chancellor, University of Durham)

Sir John Fulton, M.A.

(Vice-Chancellor, University of Sussex)

J. H. E. Griffiths, O.B.E., M.A., D.Phil.

(Fellow of Magdalen College and Lecturer in Physics, University of
Oxford)

J. E. Harris, C.B.E., M.A., Ph.D., F.R.S.

(Professor of Zoology, University of Bristol)

A. G. Lehmann, M.A., D.Phil.

(Professor of French and Dean of the Faculty of Letters, University of
Reading)

Miss M. McKisack, M.A., B.Litt., F.S.A.

(Professor of History, Westfield College, University of London)

J. S. Morrison, M.A.

(Senior Tutor and Vice-Master, Churchill College, Cambridge)

Miss M. R. Price, M.A.

(Headmistress, Milham Ford School, Oxford)

E. M. Wright, M.A., D.Phil.

(Principal and Vice-Chancellor, University of Aberdeen)

A. Tattersall, M.A. (Secretary)

(University of London)

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

FOREWORD

By Sir John Wolfenden
Chairman of the University Grants Committee

Sir Edward Hale and his colleagues were appointed in March 1961. In June
1963 they submitted an interim Report on the use of vacations by students, and
it is already clear that their comments on that important topic have made a
considerable impact. They have now presented their final Report and the
University Grants Committee welcomes the opportunity of making it available
to a wider public.

The report starts from the standpoint that the main object of an under-
graduate course should be the development of a student’s capacity to think for
himself and to work on his own. From this point of view it examines the effect
on undergraduate education not only of the various teaching methods in use
(such as lectures, discussion periods, laboratory work, field classes) but also of
the setting in which this teaching is given and of the examinations to which it
leads.

These problems will be especially pressing in the years immediately ahead,
when increased numbers of students have not yet produced correspondingly
increased numbers of teachers. The University Grants Committee hopes there-
fore that this comprehensive and perceptive appraisal will be widely studied
and freely discussed; and it offers its thanks to Sir Edward Hale and his
colleagues for the thoroughness and sensitiveness with which they have
completed a difficult and responsible task.

J. F. Wolfenden

August, 1964

iii

( 90678 )

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

CONTENTS

Chapter Page

I Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

(i) Preliminary 1

(ii) General Considerations 8

(iii) Arrangement of Report 10

II Structure of Degree Courses and the University Year . . 12

(i) Degree Courses 12

(ii) The University Year 18

III Some Problems of Organisation . . . . . . . . 23

IV Introduction of Students to University Life 30

V Students’ Use of their Time 37

VI Student Opinion 45

VII Lectures and Discussion Periods 52

(i) Lectures . . ■ - 52

(ii) Discussion Periods 60

(iii) Uses of Lectures and Discussion Periods . . . • 72

VIII Practical Classes 27

IX Examinations . . 84

X Equipment for Teaching 94

XI University Teaching as a Matter for Training and Study . . 103

XII Summary 113

APPENDICES

I List of Persons and Bodies who submitted Material . . 120

II Questions for Universities 121

III Memorandum from National Union of Students . . . . 124

IV Memorandum from Scottish Union of Students . . . . 132

V Questionnaire on Introduction to University (Inquiry A) . . 139

VI Note on Inquiry A circulated to Universities . . . . 142

VII Main Student Survey: relevant questions extracted from

questionnaire issued jointly with the Committee on
Higher Education • ■ I'l^

VIII Teachers’ Survey : relevant questions extracted from question-

naire issued jointly with the Committee on Higher Education 150
IX Memorandum from Prof. T. L. Cottrell on Effect of Size of

Tutorial Group on Teaching Efficiency 122

Note: Statistical material will be published in a separate Statistical Appendix.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

(i) PRELIMINARY

1. We were appointed on 10th March, 1961, by the University Grants Com-
mittee ‘to make a comparative study of undergraduate teaching methods and
practices current in the universities and colleges of Great Britain in the fields
of arts and pure and applied science.’ We have been informed that the last
words are to be read as covering the whole field of undergraduate study with
the exception of Medicine, Dentistry, and Veterinary Science. We have assumed
that the institutions within the scope of our inquiry are those which participate
in the Treasury grants administer^ by the University Grants Committee who
appointed us. We have met on 44 days. We have already made an interim report,
published in June, 1963, on the use of vacations by students.

2. Much has been written about university teaching in the past, and latterly
statistical information has been collected about it in certain universities. There
has, however, so far as we are aware, been no systematic collection of statistical
data, covering all the universities of this country, which shows how students use
their time and the extent to which various teaching methods and practices
prevail. We considered the collection of such information to be an important
part of our task, and we obtained it from four statistical surveys described
below. In preparing the questionnaires used in these surveys we consulted the
Association of University Teachers, the National Union of Students, and the
Scottish Union of Students. To the first of these bodies we were indebted for
a memorandum containing suggestions for the questionnaire addressed to a
sample of university teachers.

3. Our inquiry, however, was only partly statistical. We also obtained
information on a number of matters which do not lend themselves to statistical
treatment. Such information was derived from memoranda sent to us by
universities and colleges in response to a set of questions requiring extensive
answers, and from letters and memoranda sent to us by individuals in response
to an open invitation given first in the press and then through the universities.
A list of the persons and bodies who sent us material, either voluntarily or on
request, is given in Appendix I. We also received memoranda from the British
Universities Film Council, the Standing Conference of National and University
Libraries, the National Union of Students, the Scottish Union of Students, and
the reports of surveys on teaching methods carried out by the Universities of
Birmingham and Edinburgh and the Nottingham University Union. The
University Grants Committee made available to us the memoranda which they
had received from student organisations during their last general visitation of
the universities. We also received oral evidence from universities and colleges
and from certain heads of university departments. We should like to take this
opportunity of expressing our gratitude for the willing co-operation which we
enjoyed in our inquiry, both from students and from senior members of

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

universities. The questions which we asked universities to answer form
Appendix II of this report, and the memoranda from the National Union of
Students and the Scottish Union of Students form Appendices III and IV.

4. The four statistical surveys referred to in para. 2 were carried out by means
of questionnaires addressed to samples of students and university teachers. The
questions in these were so framed that they could be answered by putting a
mark against one (or more) of a limited number of specific answers. Such
answers can then be transferred to punched cards and mechanically tabulated,
and by these methods the replies of a much larger number of respondents can
be handled than would be possible if the respondent were left to answer the
question in his own words. The questions asked in this way were for the most
part questions of fact, for which this type of questionnaire is better suited than
for assessing opinion. For the latter purpose we relied mainly on the memoranda
and oral evidence referred to in para, 3.

5. Of the four questionnaires three were addressed to students and were
administered by interview. A sample of about 2,000 students of the second and
later years was questioned in the autumn of 1961 on the use which they bad
made of the long vacation of that year for the purpose of their studies, and our
interim report on the use of vacations by students was largely based on this
surv ey. The questionnaire used for that survey forms an appendix to our interim
report. A separate sample of approximately 1,000 first-year students was
questioned at the same time on the extent to which they recei\ed, either before
or immediately after entering the university, instruction or advice on the nature
of university work and generally on how to be a university student. This
questionnaire, and a memorandum giving the results which we circulated to
universities, form Appendices V and VI to this report. We deal further with
this subject in the chapter of our report on the introduction of students to
university life.

6. These two surveys we were able to carry out ourselves, without employing
the Social Survey or a contractor, through the kind co-operation of the
universities collaborating, in most cases, with the University Unions, but at
Cambridge with the Sociological Society and at Oxford with the Institute of
Statistics. The tabulation was done for us by the University of London, who
were good enough to put Hollerith machines at our disposal in off-peak periods.

7. The third survey, which we refer to in this report as the ‘main student
survey', was part of a much larger undertaking carried out in February, 1962,
by the Social Survey for the Committee on Higher Education, but including
certain questions designed to meet our requirements. The total sample used was
one of 5.000 students, graduate as well as undergraduate, and including medical,
dental, and veterinary students. This w'as one in twenty-two of the student
population. Of the 4.224 undergraduate students in the sample, 4,095 were
interviewed, and of those interviewed 3,374 were students in the fields of study
with which we are concerned.

8. In these interviews students were asked to record the types of teaching
period which they had attended in the seven days immediately before the
interview,* and to give for each period the subject taught, the time taken, and
the number of students and staff present. They were also asked to record the

• Except where sickness or examinations occupied more than two days in the sev’en, in
which case the record covered the seven days immediately before the interruption.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

time given in the same week to study outside teaching periods, and the place
where that study took place. They were asked a number of other questions on
such matters as the arrangements for organising their studies, and the frequency
with which they attended discussion periods and with which they prepared
written work for criticism. They were also asked questions as to the changes
which they would like in the time given to various forms of teaching. The
questions with which we regard ourselves as concerned are printed as
Appendix VII to this report.

9. The fourth survey, addressed to a one-in-four sample of university teachers,
was also part of a wider survey carried out for the Committee on Higher
Education and for us by Messrs. Attwood Statistics Limited. The questions
addressed to teachers of undergraduates within the scope of our inquiry were
answered by 2.017 respondents. They covered such matters as the division of
university teachers" time between the various forms of teaching in the fortnight
1 8th February to 3rd March, 1962; teaching methods, including the size of
group taught: the accommodation and the secretarial and technical assistance
available for teaching: the training in teaching, if any, which the respondents
had received: and their participation in examinations. Opinions were also
sought on certain matters germane to our inquiry. This survey, which was
administered by post, took place in March, 1962. The questionnaire used in the
part of the survey with which we w ere primarily concerned forms Appendix VIII
to this report.

10. We are most grateful to all who helped us by taking part in these surveys.
The response rates to the student surveys were 93 per cent, 94 per cent, and
97 per cent, respectively. The response rate to our part of the questionnaire
addressed to university teachers was 84 per cent. These are remarkably high
figures, and afford gratifying evidence of the interest shown in our work by
students and staff alike. The response of university teachers was particularly
good, considering that their questionnaire was administered by post.

1 1 . The complexity of our subject is such as to set certain problems for the
statistician, and it may be useful to give at the outset some account of these
problems in order that the inevitable limitations on a statistical approach may
be understood, particularly when the resources available for the analysis and
tabulation of statistical data are on a limited scale.

12. In the year 1961-62 in which the statistical data used for our report were
collected there were 24 universities* and 3 colleges participating in the Treasury
grant, apart from new universities which had yet to admit their fint students.
These institutions are of very varying size, so that even with the largest sample
used for any of the surveys in which we took part (4.09.6 undergraduates including
medical, etc., students) 13 out of 27 university and college sub-satnples were of
less than 100. the lowest number from which statistically reliable results can be
expected. Thus even if all the universities had been homogeneous, the statistical
limitations w ould have been serious.

13. The number of autonomous teaching units is, however, very much greater.
It is not merely that some universities are subdivided into schools or colleges,
which enjoy a wide measure of independence; in the University of London, for
example, apart from its medical schools, some 15 institutions participating in

♦ Counting as two the divisions of the then University of Durham whkh h*v« since become
separate universities and which were treated as separate units for the purpose of our sarveys.

Printetd image (digitisetd by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

the Treasury grant are concerned with undergraduate teaching within the field
of our inquiry. Even in unitary universities the faculties, and within the faculties
the academic departments, are in varying degrees autonomous so far as
teaching methods are concerned. It was symptomatic of this state of affairs that
when universities were asked to give us written answers to a number of questions,
separate answers to some of the questions were provided by each of the faculties
of most universities, and in some cases by the individual departments.

14. The inability of some universities to answer some of our questions except
department by department is due to more than professorial individualism: it
reflects the fact that the question what teaching methods should be employed
can only be usefully asked and answered in relation to the particular subject-
matter to be taught. The first distinction that will occur to everyone at this
point is that between laboratory subjects and non-laboratory subjects, or
‘library’ subjects, as they are sometimes called. This distinction, however, is not
clear-cut, and even among ‘library" subjects there are a number (e.g. languages,
History, Law) where differences of subject matter will clearly be reflected in
differences of teaching method.

15. It is not a simple matter to divide the field of undergraduate study into
subjects. The word ‘subject’ has different meanings in different contexts; a
subject title may be used to denote either the field comprised in a course of
study, or in part of such a course, or, more narrowly, the field comprised by a
single examination paper. The number of ‘subjects' studied by undergraduates,
even in the wider sense in which the subject title denotes the field covered by
a course or by part of a two-subject or three-subject course, is very large. The
table published annually by the University Grants Committee of ‘subjects’ in
which honours degrees were obtained gives roughly 150 titles of subjects outside
the medical, dental, and veterinary field, while the number of subjects and
combinations of subjects separately listed approaches 300. For our purposes a
more summary classification was necessary. The field of undergraduate study
was divided into 17 subject groups, but it has not been possible to obtain
separate analyses for them. In the questionnaire addressed to a sample of
university teachers, separate analyses were obtained of the answers given by
teachers of 1 1 subjects attracting large numbers of students, namely, English,
French, History, Geography, Economics, Law', Mathematics, Physics, Chem-
istry, Biology, and Engineering. Even so, some of the subjects chosen (French,
Geography, Law) were represented in the sample by well under 100 teachers,
so that separate results for these subjects required to be treated with some
caution. For most purposes we have had to rest content with a broad classification
by faculties.

16. While differences of subject are clearly an important source of difference
between teaching methods, there are also some differences of method in the
teaching of the same subject between one university and another, for example,
the greater use of the tutorial or supervision at Oxford and Cambridge, and it
was necessary for us to take such differences into consideration. As the smaller
universities would not yield samples large enough to produce significant results
for the whole university, and still less for any subdivisions of it by faculty or
subject, it seemed to us that our best course would be to divide the universities
into groups which would provide samples sufficiently large to yield significant
results, and which might be expected to have common characteristics. In doing
this we fully appreciated that every university has individual characteristics

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

which tend to invalidate any form of classification, and that when statistic
appear to show that a group of universities possesses a certain characteristic
in a greater (or less) degree than other groups of universities, it cannot be
assumed that every university in that group possesses this characteristic more
(or less) than some universities in other groups.

17. The grouping which we adopted was also adopted by the Committee on
Higher Education. It is as follows:

(a) Oxford and Cambridge: These two universities are so commonly thought
of as a group that they may be considered to resemble each other more
than they do. There are important differences, e.g, in the structure of
degree courses and in the timing of examinations, which react on the
organisation of teaching.

(h) London: In this university the syllabuses of degree courses and
examinations are controlled by the University Senate, and where, as in
the field of arts, there is inter-collegiate teaching, there is a tendency
to retain a common syllabus and common examinations. If only for
this reason any grouping is bound to separate London from other
universities: but the institutions which the University comprises vary
enormously both in size and scope, and these differences naturally have
their effect on the teaching which they offer.

(f ) The Larger Civic Universities: This group comprises Birmingham, Bristol
Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester together with the Manchester College of
Science and Technology, Newcastle. Nottingham, and Sheffield.
id) The Smaller Civic Universities: This group comprises Durham. Exeter,
Hull, Keele, Leicester, Reading, Southampton, and Sussex.

(e) Wales: i.e., the four constituent colleges of the University of Wales.
(St. David's College, Lampeter, had not at the time of our surveys
come into association with the University College of South Wales and
Monmouthshire.)

{/) Scotland: i.e., the Scottish universities, including the Royal CoUege of
Science and Technology, Glasgow, which has since become the University
of Strathclyde. The Scottish universities, while they cover a wide range
of size, have certain similarities arising partly from tradition and partly
from the fact that the Scottish schools produce candidates for university-
places whose qualifications are less specialised (and who are younger)
than the products of the English Vlth forms.

18. Of the new universities only those of Sussex and Strathclyde are induded
in the classification given in para. 17. In the session l%l-62, in which our four
surveys were carried out. the University of Sussex had an academic staff of
1 1 and 50 students, and its numbers were therefore too small to have any effert
on the statistics. But we received both written and ora! evidence from this
University. None of the other six new universities (York. East Anglia, Lancaster.
Essex, Warwickshire, and Kent) had admitted any students in 1961-62. We
received oral but not written evidence from the first three. The foundation of
the University of Stirling was announced just before we concluded our sittings.
19 We are aware from these discussions as well as from published statements
(e.g. the Reith lectures by the Vice-Chancellor of Essex) that the new universities
are introducing or proposing forms of organisation, courses, and teaching and
examining arrangements which are new or modify in various ways practices

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

hitherto current, for example, by the abolition of departments and the
organisation of studies in multi-subject schools, by group teaching, and by the
use of continuous assessment as a method of examination. We have made some
comment on the last of these, but in general we have felt that it would be
premature to examine in detail schemes which are either only just being brought
into operation or still in the planning stage.

20. The division into ‘larger’ and ‘smaller’ of the English universities other
than Oxford, Cambridge, and London, may appear arbitrary, but in fact there
was at the time of our survey a well-marked gap in size between the universities
in these groups, Nottingham (2,636 students*) being the smallest of the former,
and Hull (1,770 students*) being the largest of the latter. There are other
important differences. All universities in the former group have technological
faculties, and all but one (Nottingham) have medical schools, while in the latter
none had a medical school and the first four had little or no applied science.
These differences are important for the departments of pure science which have
to provide teaching services for medicine and applied science where these are
present. Moreover, in the latter group the proportion of students in residence
is much higher than in the former.

21. The fact that a particular method of teaching is more prevalent in one
university group than another is not always, by itself, evidence of any significant
difference in teaching methods between the universities concerned. The time
which university teachers give to practical classes provides a simple example.
At Oxford and Cambridge this time, expressed as a proportion of all teaching
time, is approximately two-thirds of the average for the whole country, but as
the proportion of science students at Oxford and Cambridge is rather less than
two-thirds of the proportion elsewhere, the difference between these and other
universities in the proportion of time given to practical classes is clearly the
effect of a difference in the balance of studies, and not of a significant difference
between the teaching methods employed at Oxford and Cambridge and those
employed at other universities. How important these differences in the balance
of studies may be in assessing the significance of apparent differences in teaching
methods between one university group and another may be seen from Table l.I.

Table 1.1 Undergraduates in Faculty Groups, 1961-62

Oxford

and

: Cambridge

London

Larger

civic

i Smaller
i civic

Wales

' Scotland

All

; Great
; Britain

Per cent ■

Per cent

! Per cent

; Per cent

Per cent

Percent

Arts, including Social

Studies

48 !

Pure ScieiK« . .

Applied Science fin-
eluding Agrkoilture

and Forestry)

IfX)

100

Source: University Grants Committee.

Kale: In this and all other tables, except where stated. Medicine, Dentistry, and Veterinary
Science do not occur.

* Including graduate students.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

22. Before ending this preliminary section of our report it is necessary to say
something about nomenclature. Some of the terms in common use to describe
the various methods of university teaching are not sufficiently precise to form a
satisfactory basis for comparative statistics. The word 'tutoriar, for example,
which the Shorter O.xford English Dictionary defines, when used as a substantive,
as ‘a period of individual instruction given by a college tutor', is sometimes used
for quite large classes. While we had no desire to dictate to universities the
senses in which the terms describing the different kinds of teaching period are
used in their own domestic discussions, it seemed to us that a comparative
study would be impossible without a uniform nornendalure. We accordingly
thought it necessary, for the purposes of the main student survey and the
survey of university teachers, to attach precise meanings to the terms uMd. and
these will be found in the respective questionnaires.

23. The University Grants Committee for their statistics have divided the field
of university study outside the medical, dental, and veterinary fields into five
faculty groups, arts, social studies, pure science, applied science, and Agriculture,
Horticulture, and Forestry. The last group contains only 1.682 undergraduate
students, so that a one-in-22 sample— the largest used for any of our student
surveys — would have produced a sample of only 77. In these circumstances, we
have included .Agriculture, Horticulture, and Forestry, in applied science. The
Committee on Higher Education introduced a refinement into the nomenclature
of the University Grants Committee by describing the arts subjects which are
not social studies as ‘humanities', reserving the term ‘arts' for the humanities
and social studies taken together. We have followed them in this. The word
'science' with no qualifying adjective should be read as meaning pure and
applied science, taken together. The term 'student' should be read, unless the
conte.xt otherwise requires, as meaning an undergraduate student whose course
lies within the range of subjects with which we are concerned. The term
‘unallocated student' is used for one who is not yet committed either to a
course leading to an honours degree or to one leading to a pass or ordinary
degree. The term 'supervision', which is used at Cambridge to denote coUege
teaching, we have used in its more genera! sense of superintendence or oversight,
except where the context shows that it refers to college teaching at Cambridge.

24. In the treatment of statistical material, tests of significance have been
applied and used in order to frame conclusions. Where we are seeking to isolate
the student who is ‘in the middle of the road', we have tended to use medians,
rather than averages, where possible, since averages can give undue weight to
extremes, whereas the 'median' has as many above him as below him in the
total spread. W'e have likewise used ‘upper quartifc' fthe figure which has
25 per cent of the subjects in a table above and 75 cent below) and 'lower
quartile' (that with 75 per cent above and 25 per cent below) to help particularise
the distribution of students along the range of any given table.

25. In this report we shall devote separate chapters to the various groups of
problems to which our attention has been drawn by the evidence we have
received, and we shall quote statistics to the extent necessary to illustrate our
comments. A further selection of statistka! evidence will be found in the
Statistical Appendix, to be published separately from this Report, But before
we tarn to particular problems there are certain general considerations which
we would mention.

Printe(d image (digitiseid by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

(ii) GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

26. In approaching our task we are conscious that there are many shades of
opinion as to the proper function of a university as a teaching institution.
Universities have long accepted the two-fold task of ensuring the advance of
knowledge in the future by training the next generation of scientists and scholars,
and of preparing men for the learned professions by immersing them in subjects
which, while being desirable in view of their future professions, are at the same
time intellectually stimulating and broadly educative. But the students who
flock to the universities today are more diversified than in the past, and the
careers to which they aspire are more varied, while at the same time their
motives in seeking a university degree are increasingly vocational. These
developments have presented a formidable challenge to university teachers who
aim at teaching their subjects in such a way that they not only serve as a basis
of professional skill but also stimulate and broaden the mind. We have been
impressed by the interest in and concern for undergraduate teaching shown by
those who have come before us to give evidence.

27. To assess fully the extent to which universities have succeeded in meeting
this challenge it would be necessary to consider not only the methods by which
students are taught but also the content of the courses which they follow in
working for their degrees. This would take us far beyond our reference. But
methods of teaching as well as the content of courses are important factors in
the success of undergraduate education, and in considering them we have kept
before us the need for university teaching to combine training for professional
life with the development of the student’s mind.

28. The challenge to the present-day university teacher comes not only from
the increased numbers of students and the diversity of their social and educa-
tional backgrounds, but also from the growth in the volume and complexity
of knowledge. One effect of the growth of knowledge is that first-degree courses
tend to become overloaded with fact. Attention has been drawn to this tendency
in successive reports of the University Grants Committee as well as in that of
the Committee on Higher Education. The danger is that the student will spend
too much of the limited time at his disposal on memorising facts, and will have
insufficient time to master the principles underlying his subject and to develop
his powers of thought. If, as we Ixlieve, the most important purpose of a
university education is to teach the student to think for himself, this is a serious
danger, and it is one of which we believe that the universities are becoming
more widely aware.

29. The first remedy for overloading must be to keep the nature and content
of courses under constant review, in order to eliminate all unessential or obsolete
material. This may not be simply a matter of detailed pruning. There are
occasions when the development of a subject makes it desirable to re-examine
the whole approach to it in undergraduate courses. Another remedy which
some of our witnesses favoured was a lengthening of the first-degree course,
but we agree with the Committee on Higher Education* (paras. 280-282) that
this remedy is not open in present circumstances. Yet another way in which
relief has been obtained is by the institution of postgraduate courses of
instruction. In science this has been facilitated by the decision taken in 1957
by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research to extend the scope of
their awards to cover such courses. Partly as a result of this change, the growth

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

in the number of advanced (mainly graduate) students in the universities has
been accelerated. In the five years 1956-57 to 1961-62, in which the number
of undergraduate students increased by 23 per cent, the number of advanced
students {other than those studying education) increased by 50 per cent. The
Committee on Higher Education advocate a further increase in post-graduate
work, partly with a view to reducing the content of specialised knowledge
required in first-degree courses, and partly for other reasons (paras. 289-295).

30. If this tendency continues, as seems likely and desirable, undergraduate
courses might come to be designed and taught merely as a preliminary to work
for a higher degree. We should deplore this. In our view the essential purpose
of the first-degree course is to give the student a preparation for his professional
life which does not depend for its value on the addition of a postgraduate
course. The practice of proceeding to further degrees in science as a preparation
for outside professional work as well as for academic work does not in our
view make this principle any less applicable to science courses. The aim and
nature of the undergraduate course seem to us to be quite distinct. This should
be not only or even primarily to equip the student with knowledge, but also,
and more importantly, to teach him to think for himself and work on his own.
We shall assess the methods and practice of university teaching accordingly.

31. The university teacher’s responsibility is divided between his under-
graduate and graduate students. Responsibility for many of the latter may
appear to be a mark of honour and intellectual distinction, which may tend to
make him feel that undergraduate teaching can be left to the less distinguished
of his colleagues. Such a tendency would be subversive of the kind of university
we envisage as the best, where a due balance is kept between undergraduate and
postgraduate teaching, and the most eminent teachers regard their responsibility
to undergraduates as different from but no less honourable to discharge than
their duty to the graduates under their supervision.

32. Concentration by university teachers on postgraduate teaching leads to
further dangers. Since a scientist or scholar feels that he can guide a graduate
student only in the necessarily narrow field of knowledge which he has made
particularly his own, he is often inclined to e.xtcnd this attitude to undergraduate
teaching. TThis has an undesirable effect on the character of undergraduate
teaching. It leads to unwillingness to teach over a wide field, so that the under-
graduate’s teaching has to be divided among a number of experts. The specialist
may be more concerned to ensure that the student learns the latest developments
in his speciality than to use his subject as a means of developing the student’s
pvowers of thought. A merely factual knowledge of the latest developments in
a growing subject is a wasting asset. For the ordinary undergraduate, whether
or not he is going to use the subjects he leams as the basis for a professional
career, it is not the latest developments or the acquisition of a corpus of
knowledge that are most valuable. It is tte development of a mind and its
training in method and attack which are important. Whereas postgraduate
study must necessarily be subject-centred, undergraduate teaching should be
student-centred. The former should be clearly distinguished from the latter,
and must not be allowed to determine its character.

33. The university student’s education is necessarily conditioned by its setting,
the structure of the degree course determining the range of knowledge on w hich
he exercises bis mind, the temporal framework (session, term, and vacation),
the administrative structure through which his work and the teaching he receives

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

is organised, the various methods (lectures, discussion periods etc.) by which
he is taught, and the examinations by which his progress and achievement are
assessed- All these structures involve certain problems, and we shall examine
them all from the standpoint of their effect on the student’s education.

(iii) ARRANGEMENT OF REPORT

34. We begin (Chapter II) with some observations on the structure of degree
courses, which have certain effects on other structures. The fact that a number
of degree courses cover a range of subject wider than the academic department
raises difficulties of supervision. The sessional examinations which some degree
courses necessarily involve, coming immediately before the long vacation, add
to the difficulties of ensuring the proper use of that vacation by students. This
leads to the temporal structure which we then consider, and discuss the possible
effects of a change in the date at which the academic year begins. We then pass
to the administrative structure (Chapter III) and deal with the effect on teaching
and supervision of the size and character of the departments which in most
universities form the basic administrative units.

35. At this point we turn to the student’s life in the university. We first
(Chapter IV) give some account of the way in which he is introduced to
university study before his arrival and immediately after it, and we consider
how far the teaching and supervision he receives in his first year help him to
acclimatise himself. We have next to show how much time the student gives to
academic work. We have already in our interim report dealt with this matter
for the vacations, which account for about three-eighths of most university
courses. In Chapter V we show how much time students of various categories
gave to academic work in a week between late January and early March, 1962,
how this time was divided between instruction and private study, and how time
under instruction was divided between the various kinds of teaching period.

36. In Chapter VI we deal with the opinions of students on the way in which
they are taught. Student opinion is critical of the lecture, and shows a wide-
spread desire for more teaching by discussion periods — seminars and tutorials —
and we accordingly turn in Chapter VII to a discussion of these two methods of
teaching. In dealing with lectures, we summarise the views given to us by
universities of the place of the lecture in the scheme of teaching, and deal with
such matters as size of lecture-audience, students’ notes of lectures, the provision
of written material in connection with lectures, and the question whether
lectures should be obligatory. In considering discussion periods we also give
the views of universities on this method of teaching. We discuss the appropriate
size of seminar and tutorial classes. In this connection we describe the use made
of the small tutorial at Oxford and Cambridge, and discuss the criticism of the
one-to-one tutorial by the Committee on Higher Education. We also show the
extent to which students are given written work to do in their own time. We
end this chapter with a section in which we consider the respective uses of
lectures and discussion periods and the importance of students’ written work
in teaching by discussion. In Chapter VIII, on the use of practical and certain
other classes, we give some statistical information and set out the purposes
which we think are served by practical classes, adding some observations on
drawing-office and example classes.

37. Chapter IX deals with examinations. In it we consider the mutual reactions
of examinations and teaching, and the various methods of conducting examina-

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

tions and their effect on teaching. There is in this countrj- more than one
system of examinations, and the differences between them raise some rather
fundamental questions. We mention some experimental innovations which are
being tried.

38. There has been some criticism of the universities on the grounds that they
have failed to take advantage of technological developments to improve the
efficiency of their teaching, and that university teachers are insufficiently
trained for their work. In Chapter X we deal with equipment for teaching in
the broadest sense, including libraries, accommodation, ancillary staff, and
teaching aids. We end this chapter with some remarks on the possible application
to universities of ‘programm^ learning". !n Chapter XI we discuss university
teaching as a matter for training and study. We show how far university teachers
have in fact been trained, and consider, in the light of our discussions with
universities, what training might usefully be given. We discuss why university
teaching has seldom been the subject of research and experiment in this country,
and give a brief account of the way in which operational research in this field
has been promoted in America and of the work which has been done there.
We conclude by discussing how operational research and experiment might be
promoted here.

190678)

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter II

STRUCTURE OF DEGREE COURSES AND THE
UNIVERSITY YEAR

(i) DEGREE COURSES

39. The Committee on Higher Education collected a considerable volume of
evidence, to which we have been given access, on the structure of first-degree
courses. The subject is treated in the report of that committee in paras. 247-283,
and will be dealt with at greater length in their Appendix Two (B), Part III,
which is shortly to be published. We do not think it necessary for us to duplicate
this full account of a most complicated matter, but there are certain features of
degree structures which have important reactions on teaching methods, and on
these some comment is necessary from us. To make this comment intelligible
requires a brief account of the features of the degree structure which call for
comment. In giving this we have made some statements which, though broadly
true, do not apply without qualification to all universities. It seemed to us that
if all the qualifications needed for complete accuracy were inserted, the resulting
loss of clarity would outweigh the gain in accuracy.

40. When we come to deal with differences in teaching methods between
groups of universities, it will be found that the groups which usually show the
greatest differences from others are the Scottish universities and Oxford and
Cambridge, with London sometimes in a position intermediate between O.xford
and Cambridge and the national average. In Scotland, and to some extent
elsewhere, these differences in teaching methods arise mainly from differences
in the structure of degree courses and in the proportions of students reading for
honours and ordinary or pass degrees respectively.

41. In 1961-62, 96 per cent of the degrees* awarded by Oxford and Cambridge
Universities were honours degrees. At London University honours degrees
represented 94 per cent of degrees received by students at institutions partici-
pating in the Treasury grant, and 92 per cent of those received by all students,
internal and external. At the civic universities honours and ordinary degrees
were awarded in the proportions 71 : 29, ordinary degrees at those universities
being more frequent in science (33 per cent) and technology (39 per cent) than
in arts ( 19 per cent) and social studies (25 per cent). The range of variation in
the proportions of ordinary' degrees awarded by individual civic universities was
from over 40 per cent (Newcastle, Liverpool, Manchester, and Sheffield) to
15 per cent (Birmingham and Exeter) and 3 per cent at Keele. In Wales the
proportions of honours and ordinary degrees were 57 ; 43. In Scotland the
majority of degrees (56 per cent) were ordinary degrees. The universities of
Scotland and Wales, which in 1961-62 accounted for 20 per cent of all first
degrees awarded in Great Britain, awarded more than half of all the ordinary

*Soum: University Grants Committee. The degrees to which this chapter relates are non-
med^al degrees only, and the proportions quoted are correct of such degrees only. By non-
medjcai we mean other than in medicine, dentistry, or veterinary science.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

degrees awarded in humanities. These difference between university groups in
the proportions of honours and ordinary degrees are only to a minor extent
related to differences in the balance of studies. The variations between faculty
groups are much smaller than those between university groups, the range of
inter-faculty variation being from 87 per cent of honours degrees in social studies
to 67 per cent in technology*.

42. Courses leading to honours degrees tend to be more specialised than those
leading to ordinary or pass degrees, though there is an increasing tendency for
faculties of humanities and pure science to offer courses in two subjects which
lead to honours degrees. A course may perhaps be regarded as specialised if it
has only one main subject, and the scope of that subject is not wider than would
normally be assigned to a single academic department. On this basis it appears,
from the particulars given in the annual returns of the University Grants
Committee.t that specialised courses leading to honours accounted for not less
than approximately 80 per cent of the honours degrees, and 60 per cent of all
degrees, conferred in 1961-62 for courses in our field. In the main student
survey each respondent was asked what main subject or subjects he was reading
for his degree or diploma. For this purpose a choice of 58 subject groups was
offered, and the instructions to interviewers asked them to enter as few separate
subjects as possible. Of 978 non-medical students in their final year, 73 per cent
said that they were reading one main subject. 19 per cent that they were reading
two, and 8 per cent that they were reading three or more.

43. Specialisation, however, is a relative term, and it should not be inferred,
from the fact that a course is described by the title of a single subject, that it is
specialised in the sense of being narrow. A number of such courses require the
study of ancillary subjects falling within the province of academic departments
other than that responsible for the main subject, and the teaching given in the
main department may itself cover a considerable range. Thus a course of which
the title suggests the study of a language may in fact include options giving the
student the chance to interest himself in the history, literature, thought, and
art of the country in which the language is spoken. Such a course cannot be
said to be narrow.

44. While courses in one main subject have hitherto accounted for the majority
of honours degrees, courses in three or more subjects have almost always led
to ordinary or pass degrees, and though there are certain notable exceptions at
Oxford and Cambridge (e.g.. Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the former;
Natural Sciences, Part I, at the latter), and though some other English
universities award honours degrees for general courses in arts or science, the
number of students receiving honours degrees after general courses is at present
inconsiderable. The position is probably changing, partly owing to the advent
of new universities which are introducing honours courses in a wider range of
subjects than has hitherto been usual, and partly owing to the introduction of
joint honours courses in a number of other universities. But these changes have
not yet gone far enough to have much effect on the general statistical picture,
and at the moment it remains true that honours and specialisation tend to go
together.

45. The prestige of the specialised course is not unconnected with the
departmental organisation of most of the universities. An academic department

* Apart from agriculture <38 per cent>.

+ Cmnd. 2135. See Table 8, Main Subjects in which Honours Degrees Wrcre obtained.

( 90678 ) ® -

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

naturally tends to take more interest in those students whose field of study is
centred in its subject, and for whose teaching the department is solely or mainly
responsible, than in those whose studies are spread over several departments.
The greater interest taken in the student reading for special honours may make
other students feel that they are regarded as second-class citizens. We revert
to this matter in a later chapter.

46. Some universities in England (including Oxford, Cambridge, and some
London colleges) have ceased, with minor exceptions, to admit students except
to read for honours, and students so admitted proceed in most cases directly to
specialised courses of study. Whether this state of affairs is the cause of, or is
caused by, the specialised character of sixth-form study in the English grammar
schools and public schools we do not propose to discuss ; but the two phenomena
are certainly linked together. Some of the universities which admit students
only to read for honours have retained general courses in arts or science leading
to ordinary degrees for the sole purpose of providing for students who prove
unequal to the honours courses to which they are admitted ; and others which
still admit some new entrants to generalised courses also use those courses for
the relegation of unpromising students from courses leading to special honouis.
The result of this policy is that the three-subject general course in the English
universities has suffered a serious loss of esteem, and attempts to restore the
prestige of such courses by awarding honours in them have not succeeded in
attracting many able students to them. A number of universities have introduced
joint honours courses, i.e. courses in two subjects leading to honoui s, thereby
providing the able student with an alternative to the special honours schools.

47. Other English universities have dropped their general courses altogether,
but award ordinary or pass degrees to students whose performance in the final
examinations of honours courses, though not unworthy of a degree, does not
merit honours. Thus the significance of an ordinary or pass degree varies; it
may mean that the student has been successful in a course for which only pass
degrees are awarded, whatever the quality of the student’s performance ; or it
may indicate a modest success in a course in which a better performance would
have won honours.

48. A student reading for special honours whose performance is regarded as
marginal may thus be dealt with in one of two ways. He may be relegated to a
general course in three subjects leading to an ordinary degree, in which he will
sit a less exacting examination than that at the end of the honours course; or he
may be allowed to continue the specialised course, and sit for the final examina-
tion, perhaps with the omission of certain papers, and receive an ordinary
degree if his performance does not merit honours. The first of these policies is
open to two serious objections. A student who has got into difliculties with
one subject is not likely to be helped to overcome them by having to start or
resume other subjects with which he is still less familiar. A second objection,
mentioned to us in evidence by more than one university, is that a student
relegated to a course of lower standard and esteem may suffer a serious loss of
morale, which is liable to infect his fellow students. The effect of this works its
way back to the schools, tending to reinforce the view that a general course is
unsuitable for able students.

49. There is, however, an alternative which makes it unnecessary to relegate
unpromising special-honours students either to a general course or to a modified
specialised course. This is to admit all students to broad first-year courses,

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

usually in three or four subjects, which may lead either to specialised honours
courses or to broad courses leading to ordinary degrees. When this is done the
decision whether the student is to aim at honours is not taken on his first entry
into the university, but is postponed till later. This system has the advantages
that students can find their feet before being committed to a particular type of
course, and that a student who proves not to be up to honours standard does
not suifer the humiliation of being relegated to an inferior course ; he is simply
not promoted to a superior one, and can normally expect to complete his degree
course in three years. On the other hand the system may make it necessary for
the abler students to spend time on work which they have done at school* or
work which is not sufficiently difficult to stretch them, and this may result in
boredom and frustration. The problem of duplication at college or university
of work done at school is one which exists also in America and has been the
subject of operational research in that countryf. Moreover, if the first of three
years is spent on a course of this kind, the student who is later promoted to
honours will not be able to attain in three years so high a standard as he would
have attained if he had been admitted direct to study at an honours level. In
Scotland the honours course is one of four years, but four-year courses are the
exception elsewhere, and any general lengthening of courses to four years
would probably be impracticable at the present time. Students who are not yet
committed as between a course leading to honours and one leading to an ordinary
degree represent 1 3 per cent of the students in the sample.

50. The system under which students who may later specialise read several
subjects in their first year or years is in operation in some faculties of a few
universities in England, in the University of Wales, and in the Scottish universities.
In -the universities of England and Wales a decision whether the student is to
pass to a more specialised course is generally taken at the end of the first year.
In Scotland it is commonly postponed until the end of the second year, or even,
in science, the third.

51. In Scotland, where the schools give a less specialised education than in
England and Wales, and where specialisation at the university, if undertaken
at all, is postponed to a later stage, the ordinary degree retains much of its old
prestige. The courses which lead to it differ in structure in an important respect
from courses leading to ordinary degrees elsewhere. In England, where three-
subject courses survive, each of the subjects studied is generally studied for the
whole course, or at any rate until the end of the second year, and new subjects
are not normally started after the first year; while in Wales the normal pattern
is for all students to take three subjects in their first year, after which those
admitted to the honours degree course take a single subject (perhaps with an
ancillary) for two more years, and those admitted to the pass degree course

* In the main student survey, 50 per cent of students in their second or a later year (41 per
cent in arts and 58 per cent in science) said that they had repeated at the university some of the
subject-matter which they had already covered in the same way at school. (The words italicised
were italicised in the question.) The greatest differences between umveKity groups were betwren
Oxford and Cambridge (41 per cent) and Scotland (56 per cenp. Of the students who said that
they had repeated school work, 31 per cent said that they did so for more than two te™s,
23 per cent that they did so for between one and two terms, and 46 per cent that thgi did so
for one term or less. Of students in their second or a later year 91 per cent said that they
had taken examinations at the end of their first year, and of these one-third thought that
they would have passed some of the examinations whde still at school.

t In a later chapter we give a brief account of how operational research in higher education
in America is organised and financed.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

take two subjects for two years— it being most unusual to take for the last two
years a subject not studied in the first year. In Scotland, on the other hand, the
three-year course for the ordinary degree consists of a minimum of seven one-
year courses in five subjects, each course being treated as a separate entity and
examined at the end of the year. In arts, which account for nearly 60 per cent
of the ordinary degrees awarded by Scottish universities, students take two
successive one-year courses (‘ordinary’ and ‘advanced’) in each of two subjects,
the other three subjects each being represented by a single one-year course.

52. Thus the Scottish ordinary course is divided into separately examinable
courses of a year each, and the student begins the study of some of his subjects
after his first year and finishes the study of some of them before the beginning
of his last year. In a system such as this the student necessarily sits an examination
at the end of every session which he must pass, then or later, in order to obtain
his degree. Sessional examinations are not of couree confined to Scotland, but
in Scotland they are necessarily inherent in the structure of the course and form
part of the degree examination. The discontinuity of courses in Scotland creates
special difficulties in ensuring a proper use of the long vacation by students wlio
are successful in the sessional examination. We return to this point later in
this chapter.

53. Another consequence of the Scottish degree structure which has important
reactions on teaching practice is that the number of students taking the ‘first
ordinary’ course’'' in a subject is often very large, and may be altogether out
of proportion to the numbers taking the second ordinary and honours courses
in the same subject. Thus in an extreme case, sucli as moral philosophy, in
which the first ordinary course is taken by most arts students because a
philosophy course is obligatory for them, but which attracts very small numbers
of students to more advanced courses, the students in the ‘first ordinary’ class
can be about 17 times as numerous as all the other students of the .subject.
A situation such as this creates special stafling difficulties. It makes it neces.sary
to place more reliance on lectures as a means of instructing the ‘first ordinary’
class than might otherwise bo thought desirable, and limits the amount of
individual attention that can be given to members of that class. This special
feature of the Scottish degree structure needs to be borne in mind in all com-
parisons of teaching methods and practices in Scotland with those prevalent
elsewhere.

54. We asked universities to what extent and under wluit conditions they
allowed students to transfer from one kind ofeourse to another, e.g. from subject
to subject; from greater specialisation to less, or vice versa; from honours to
pass, or vice versa. We have already mentioned the principal ways in which
movement between greater and less specialisation, ;ind between honour.s and
pass courses, normally takes place. It remains to say something about changes
of subject.

55. While some subjects, such as Law, Economics, and Philosophy, are
normally started at the university, the university teaching of most subjects
presupposes that the student will have reached a certain level of attainment in
them at school; and the teaching of a subject given in the .second year of a
university course naturally presupposes that givcii in the first. A certain
uniformity of attainment by members of a class is necessary if the more advanced

* A ‘first ordinary’ course is not necessarily luken in the lirst year, and In ccrlutn subjects,
e.g. philosophy, is normally taken in the second.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

members are not to lose interest through the repetition of matter with which
they are already familiar. This may make it difficult to allow a student who has
been accepted for a specialised three-year course to change subject unless he is
in a position to give a fourth year to university study.

56. Courses which last, or may last, for four years allow more flexibility. We
have already seen that in Scottish courses a student will often start in his second
year a subject or subjects which he has not before studied at a university level,
and which may not even have figured in his school curriculum. At Cambridge
a student who has taken Part I of any Tripos at the end of his second year may
then take Part II in a subject which he did not study for Part I. In practice
such changes, for the reasons given in the last paragraph, are normally possible
only to subjects in which university teaching starts at the beginning; for example.
Law, which it is not uncommon to read for Part II of the Tripos after Natural
Sciences, Part I, completing the whole course in three years. One Cambridge
college recently* published the results obtained between 1947 and 1961 by
68 students who after taking Classics in Part I of the Tripos took other subjects
in Part II. All these other subjects were in the general field of humanities and
social studies, including Law, taken by 22 students. A better result than in
Part I was obtained by 12 students, the same by 24, and a worse by 33. There
were no failures and only 8 thirds; of the 33 who did worse, 24 did no worse
than a lower second after an upper second.

57. Universities at which students spend their first year on a broad course
covering several subjects are in a better position to allow changes of subject
than those which admit students directly to specialised courses. At the University
of Keele opportunities for a change of subject are specially favourable, and their
experience is therefore of interest. This is partly because the whole course is one
of four years for all students, and partly because the course in the first
(‘foundation’) year includes subjects in the humanities, social studies, and
science, so introducing the student to new fields of study. Here it was found
that of 111 students who between 1956 and 1960 entered their second year (in
which ‘principal’ studies in two subjects begin) over one-half elected to study a
principal subject which they had not originally intended to study, and 10 per
cent changed both subjects. Most of these changes were from school subjects
to Philosophy, Economics, and Politics. In the case of subjects normally taught
at school, a student’s range of choice must often be limited by his achievement
at school, but a certain number of students have been admitted to read English,
History, Geography, and Biology who had not passed at A-level in these subjects
at school. These students had a failure rate rather higher than those who had
obtained A-level passes in these subjects at school, but the mean marks obtained
by successful candidates in final examinations did not differ significantly between
the two groups.

58. These results of change of subject at Cambridge and Keele are of interest

in suggesting that in some fields of study a greater flexibility in choice of subject
than is commonly thought possible might be allowed without ill consequence.
We therefore welcome the change, which has just been made in the reflations
governing awards to university students from public funds, making it easier
for students to change courses by the end of the first year, even where the
change involves a fourth year of undergraduate study by a student who has
embarked on a three-year co urse.

• The Times, 2U January, 1964.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

59. We mentioned above the need for a certain uniformity of attainment
aniong students in a class if the more advanced are not to lose interest. We
asked universities whether they were able, or thought it desirable, to vary the
methods of supervision and teaching used for students of differing ability and
different standards of achievement on entry. In reply to this question we were
informed of a number of specific instances of differentiation in teaching based
on varying attainment at entry. Examples are separate classes in some ails
courses for students knowing more Greek or less on entry; alternative subsidiary
courses in a science subject for students with and without A-level passes in it;
separate seminars in economics for students with and without A-level passes
in that subject; different classes in mathematics for students of varying
achievement in that subject.

60. The distinction drawn in our question between lower ability and lower
attainment is not recognised by all universities, and in pi'actice the two problems
must overlap, since in either case the student is backward. There are broadly
two ways in which the backward can be dealt with. Either they can be kept in
the same class and given extra tuition; or they can be separated and assigned
to a different course, or to a diffei'ent stream in the same course which proceeds
more slowly than that containing the abler students. These two methods arc
not mutually exclusive. For example, all students may attend the same lectures,
but may be separated according to ability or attainment when grouped for
seminars. We encountered, however, some opposition to the idea that the
weaker students should be segregated from the abler, on the ground that tlic
former benefit from the presence of the latter in any class in which students take
part in the discussion. The problem is not an easy one, as the inteicsts of the
abler and the weaker students may not be altogether reconcilable.

(ii) THE UNIVERSITY YEAR

61. The arrangement by which university courses normally begin in October
and end in June is part of a temporal structure which is common to all stages
and forms of education in this country. It has, however, certain disadvantages,
and proposals for a change have been made in other quarters.* The most
attractive, among the various proposals that have been put forward, would
seem to be a year running from January to December instead of from October
to September, on the assumption that the school year would remain unchanged,
and that the ‘A’ level G.C.E. examination would continue to be held in July,
This is a matter of great complexity and importance, particularly in relation to
admissions. There has already been some public discussion, and there will
doubtless be more, on this and other aspects of the matter which fall outside
our terms of reference, and which, therefore, we do not feel entitled to discuss.
But the adoption of the proposal would have certain incidental, but important,
effects on teaching, and on these we think that we should comment.

62. From our point of view there are certain advantages in a year beginning
in January. In the first place, it should lead to a better use by students of the
long vacation, which would presumably continue to be in the summer months.
We have already, in our interim report published in June, 1963, given some
account of the use made by students of the long vacation, 1961, based on a
sample inquiry conducted in the autumn of that year. We found that for a large

* See for example paras. 97 and 98 of the report of the Committee on Teaching to the
General Board of the University of Cambridge: Cambridge University Reporter, I May, 1964.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

proportion of students the long vacation is, academically speaking, time largely
wasted. Students in our sample were asked to estimate their average daily
hours of study during the vacation, excluding periods during which they used
university premises, did field or practical work related to their courses, or were
abroad as foreign language students. One hour a day or less of study was claimed
by 53 per cent, more than an hour but less than three by 31 per cent, more than
three but less than five by 1 1 per cent, and more than five by 5 per cent.

63. There was no significant difference between finalists and non-finalists in
average daily hours claimed, and it seems clear that the prospect of final
examinations in the following June is too distant to have much effect on the
diligence of students in the long vacation. If final examinations in June have
no effect, it is unlikely that sessional examinations in that month have any
either. On the other hand there was a distinct positive correlation between
average daily hours claimed and the imminence at the end of the vacation of an
examination or some other test or inquiry. This is shown in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1. Hours of Vacation Study by end-of-vacation tests

Subject to test or inquiry at the end
of the vacation

Subject to
no test or
inquiry

Average daily
hours claimed

Required
to re-sit
examination

Set written
exercise or
test, other
than re-sit of
examination

Subject to
other check
or inquiry on
use of long
vacation

One or less

Per cent
35

Per cent
36

Per cent
52

Per cent
68

One to three

Three to five

More than five . .

Number in group

263

344

407

809

Source: Vacation Enquiry: repeated from our interim report. Appendix II, para. 21.

This leads us to think that if sessional and final examinations took place in
November the change would have a salutary effect, both for finalists and others,
on the use of the long vacation. The stimulating effect which these examinations
probably now have on students during the preceding Easter vacation would of
course be lost, but owing to the greater length of the long vacation the loss
would, we think, be outweighed by the gain.

64. There is a further correlation, which appears to be of some importance,
between hours of study claimed in the long vacation and the receipt or non-
receipt of advice from teachers on vacation work. This is shown m Table 2.2 (p. _U).

65. To move examinations from June to November/December should make
it easier to give students guidance on the use of the long vacation than it is now.
At present it may not be easy to advise a student for whom the summer term
ends with an examination. If he fails this examination m who e or he mil
have to resit it in September. This will give him work to do m the long vacation

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 2.2. Hours of Vacation Study by Advice on such Study

Average daily
hours claimed

Received advice
on vacation study

Did not

receive such advice

Per cent

One or less

One to three

Three to five

More than five . .

Number in group

1,076

747

Source: Vacation Survey: repeated from our interim report, Appendix II, para. 16.

and an immediate incentive to do it. It is on those who pass this examination
that its timing has an unfortunate effect. The degree of his success may determine
the pattern of a student’s work in the coming session, but may not be known
before the vacation begins. He may be coming under new teachers in the ensuing
term, and may even be starting a new subject. There are wide variations in the
extent to which university courses are discontinuous, and the point ol dis-
continuity is not always immediately before the long vacation. But it usually is;
and yet this is the very point at which the discontinuity is likely to result in the
longest possible interruption in the student’s work. The change proposed 'roold
move the most usual point of discontinuity to December, where its effects
should be less damaging.

66 The most important benefit from the change, however, would be the
effective lengthening and better utilisation of the three-year courses taken by
the majority of undergraduates. Some of the witnesses who came before us
emphasised the difficulty of compressing into a three-year course all that they
think a student should master before graduation, and advocated the addition
of another year to the first-degree course. But this would make it necessary to
reduce the numbers admitted to such courses, a step which could hardly be
contemplated in present circumstances. Any lengthening of the course which
does not involve this disadvantage is therefore to be welcomed. At present the^
three-year course at Universities other than Oxford and Cambridge is one ot
143 weeks, i.e. 90 weeks of term and 53 weeks of vacation, including only two
long vacations. Under the new proposal it would last 151 weeks, i.e. 90 weeks of
term as before but 61 weeks of vacation, including three long vacations but only
two Christmas vacations. It may be objected that an addition of eight weeks
is not of much value if the extra weeks are all weeks of vacation, but we hope
that the universities, with the help of the authorities awarding grants to students
for vacation study, are taking steps which will lead to better use of the vacations.

67. There is another consequence of moving the examination season to the
late autumn which we think might be beneficial. At most universities the second
half of the summer terra is largely occupied with examinations, and as the great
majority of academic staff take part in them, little teaching takes place in that
period. Thus, some students who are neither in their final year nor sitting a
sessional examination may be left to their own devices for a continuous period
of 18 weeks, i.e. the last five weeks of term as well as the ensuing 13 weeks of
vacation. This is too long. In some places there is tacit, or even open, permission

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

for students to go down well before the end of the summer term. If the
examination period were transferred to the latter part of the autumn term,
there would be no period longer than 13 weeks (the long vacation) during which
students would be left to themselves; and the removal of the examination
period from June to November might itself improve the chances that students
would use this time for study, since the inclement weather and shorter daylight
would reduce temptations to idleness.

68. The most obvious consequence of the change would be to lengthen from
two months to five (three months to six in Scotland) the interval between the
end of the school year and the beginning of the university session. Whether this
would be altogether disadvantageous is a matter on which more than one
opinion is possible. It would depend largely on the circumstances and character
of individual students. Some students might be improved through this experience.
Though there is no reliable evidence on the point, this sort of experience might
in some cases help to counteract the immaturity by which many students are
undoubtedly handicapped at present during their first university year. The break
with their familiar environment and their sudden independence, coming
simultaneously with the change from school to university work, impose a great
strain, and the gain in maturity and experience which would result from a few
months spent in employment or travel might help them to find their feet in
the university.

69. There is not even now anything particularly exceptional in a gap of several
months between school and university. Of the sample of about 1,000 first-year
students who answered our questionnaire on their introduction to university
life, approximately one in five was not at school during the 12 months before
entry into the university, and about 12 per cent of them were in employment
during that period. If the proposed change were made, some of those who were
about to go to university might return to school for another term. Most would
no doubt take temporary employment, but might find it difficult to settle down
to anything worth while, particularly when their success in obtaining admission
to a university was still in doubt. Others might take the opportunity to travel.
In our interim report we expressed the view that for many, students the interval
between school and university would be a more suitable time than the long
vacation for prolonged travel or other broadening experiences. If this interval
became normally one of five months, the opportunities which it afforded for
such activities would be increased. It has, however, to be recognised tha.t foreign
travel could be planned only by those who were not awaiting an interview for a
university place, since it would be impossible to plan for it with an interview
of uncertain date impending.

70. There is also one serious difficulty in the change from the point of view
of the organisation of students’ courses. AU the Scottish universities and some
others rely on a resit at the end of September to enable a sizeable proportion
of their students (upwards of 40 per cent m Scotland) to qualffy for further
study after failing or partly failing in examinations held m June. These students
now have three months in which to make good this failure. Under the new
scheme the interval would be reduced to httle more than one month and for
many students this would be insufficient. A redistribution of time between the
vacations, involving a shortening of the summer vacation and a lengthening of
tiieSmas vacation, might mitigate this, but to the extent that the Chnstm^
vacation was lengthened, some of the advantages of the change would be lost.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

71 We recognise that there are many considerations, beside its effect on
teaching which would have to be taken into account before a change in the
universitV year could be put into effect. There are a number of aspects to this
nroblem and some of them are being considered separately, but we think that
the problem in all its aspects should be considered as a whole before a decision
is taken and that full weight should be given to the improvements in the use
of students’ time which would result from the change. If these improvements
cannot be made by a change in the university year, other means of doing so
should in our view be devised. The effects of the present timing of sessional
examinations on those who do not fail them seem to us to be most unfortunate.
It may be considered necessary to retain sessional examinations before a long
vacation in order to give those who have failed to pass them a sufficient
opportunity to recover themselves without interrupting the next term’s work.
But if it is, measures should be taken to ensure that the last weeks of the sunnncr
term are properly used by those who are not being examined, and that those
who succeed in their examinations are not as a result left without sulhcient
stimulus to make proper use of the long vacation, and without guidance as to
how to do so. Arrangements which have to be retained on behalf of the weaker
students must not be allowed to be a handicap to the strongei.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter III

SOME PROBLEMS OF ORGANISATION

72. In most universities the basic unit of organisation is the department, of
which the head is commonly but not always a professor, supported by varying
numbers of teachers of other grades. The department covers a certain range of
subject within which it is responsible both for the advancement of knowledge
and for teaching, and so far as specialised accommodation and equipment are
necessary for this purpose it exercises control over their use. Departments with
cognate interests are grouped together in faculties, e.g., of arts, science, etc.,
governed by boards exercising a measure of authority. There are considerable
variations between universities both in the number of faculties and in the points
at which the lines between departments and faculties are drawn. There is also
in all universities a body, usually the Senate or Senatus, where the threads of
academic policy are drawn together and major decisions of academic policy are
taken. The degree of subordination of the departments to these higher bodies
varies a good deal. In some universities the autonomy of the department implies
a very real independence. In others the development of joint courses of study
has reduced this autonomy in some respects. A few have adopted forms of
organisation in which there are no departments as such.

73. There has been for many years, and still is, a tendency for departments
to grow both in number and size. This is not merely, or even mainly, the result
of growing numbers of students, but also of the growth in the volume and
complexity of knowledge. Some departments come into existence by a kind of
fissiparous process, subjects like Virology and Biophysics, which began as lines
of research within older departments of science, becoming sufficiently important
to be assigned to separate departments in some universities. Some long-
established departments have avoided this process by appointing more specialised
staff, and in many cases additional professors. Thus, a Department of History
may contain a number of professors (for example Professors of Ancient,
Mediaeval, Modern, and Economic History). The tradition that a professor is
prima facie the head of an autonomous department is tending to break down.
Universities have a choice, as the volume and complexity of knowledge covered
by a department grows, between enlarging it and splitting it into two, and the
way in which this question is decided will have its effect on teaching. No general
rule can be laid down as to which alternative is preferable in any particular
case. We can only draw attention to some of the consequences which follow
when departments grow in size.

74. Thus there is no homogeneity about departments. Some are quite small,
perhaps with a staff of three or four and ten specialist students— or even fewer—
a year, though such a department may have responsibility for conducting
elementary or service courses for other students. If such departments are regarded
as platoons, others are almost as large and quite as complex as a battalion;
some have little or no equipment besides books, others have laboratories and

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

a train of technicians ; some limit their activities almost exclusively to under-
graduate teaching and personal research by staff, others devote much greatei
attention to postgraduate work, research projects undertaken by teams and m
some cases in conjunction with bodies outside the universities, or postgraduate
training for particular professions; some are concerned, as regards teaching
mainly with their own specialist students, others are concerned overwhelmingly
(at least from a numerical point of view) with students reading for degrees in
other disciplines.

75. The departmental form of organisation, for all its advantages, does
involve certain teaching problems. Some are due to the effect of the size of a
department on its teaching of the honours students for whom it has the sole
or main responsibility. Others arise where a large or even a major part of the
department’s responsibility consists of service teaching, i.e., the teaching ot
students for whom other departments have the main responsibility. Others again
arise from the fact that the courses of some students cover two or more equally
rated subjects which are the fields of separate departments.. These lactors,
particularly the first and third, are likely to become of increasing importance
The expansion of the universities will cause departments to grow in size; and
the Committee on Higher Education have expressed the view (para. 262) that
a higher proportion of students should be receiving a broader education for
their first degrees, and that such a change is to be regarded as a necessary
condition for any large expansion of universities. Thus an increasing proportion
of the growing student population may be expected to follow multi-subject
courses for their first degrees.

76 We begin with the effect of size on the honours class. It is not possible to
state the present average size of departments; nor would it be very helpful or
meaningful to do so. The essential point is that most of them are growing. In
arts subjects, there is pressure for places, for example, in English, Fiench,
Elistory, Geography (big subjects in the schools); there is similar pressure m
Law and Economics; most universities have greatly enlarged their Departments
of Physics and Chemistry (to name only two sciences); and the signs are that
over the next few years super-departments with intakes of up to 100 students
will become more common, and that groupings rnay arise of what might he
called ‘constellations’ of departments, as well as different forms of fusion into
‘schools’ or faculties, where a range of combined or single-subject specialist

courses is available.

77. Much is heard nowadays of the advantage of size, particularly for science
departments. These advantages apply directly to research, but any advantage
to research should also be an advantage to teaching. Research commonly
requires resources on a scale only possible to large departments. Men of promise
or distinction need to be attracted and will be attracted to places where they
will find colleagues working on related problems, and where the expensive
equipment they require will be available. The number of lectures required does
not increase proportionately with an increase in the numbers of staff and
students, with the result that the time which members of staff have to give to
lectures tends to fall as numbers increase. This again is an attraction when
recruiting. In all such matters size is an advantage. A small science department
may find it difficult to attract staff of good calibre, partly because it cannot
provide some of the more expensive items of equipment necessai-y for research,
partly because with small numbers there may be a sense of isolation from work

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

in related fields, and partly because staff may be required to spend more time
than they would wish on lecturing and on elementary teaching or teaching
outside their own speciality. Some of these disadvantages apply also to small
arts departments. A department which is weak in research is thereby weakened
for teaching.

78. Nevertheless, not all the advantages are with large departments. There is
some truth in the saying that the efficiency of an organisation tends to vary
inversely with its size. In a small department, say one with a staff of five and
not more than 12 specialist students in any one year of the course, all speciahst
teaching can be small-group teaching; every member of the staff (including its
head) will be in close enough contact with every student to know what progress
he is or is not making ; the small size of the unit makes it easier for the student
to have his academic weaknesses dealt with; some library problems are made
easier; many problems of communication and information faced by large
departments do not arise. Small-group teaching raises no difficulties. Any
lecture can be turned, if appropriate, into a seminar, since the numbers will not
be too large for this type of teaching; and tutorial teaching can be arranged
either to ‘tie up’ with lecture courses or on any other basis. Every student can
be given the opportunity to receive tutorial teaching with any or every member
of the department, from the head downwards.

79. The administrative simplicity of the small department begins to be lost
when the number of students of any year of a course becomes greater than can
take part in a single seminar. At this stage of growth, if any central or obhgatory
part of a course is to be dealt with in seminars, whether or not auxiliary to a
lecture course, the seminars must normally be duplicated. At the same time
lectures become more formalised as the audience grows in size, but it becomes
easier, as the number of staff increases and the various specialisms within the
subject are more represented, to take more account of specialised interests in
distributing lecturing work.

80. As departments become large (say with a staff of 12 and upwards, and
an honours class of 40 or more in any year) fresh complications appear. If
teaching is to rely on tutorials or seminars geared to courses of lectures, the
arrangements necessary to provide for this in satisfactory time-tables may call
for much ingenuity and time-consuming consultation. Seminars may have to
be multiplied by four or more, and if the seminars are to be linked with a formal
lecture course, preliminary consultation between the teachers concerned is
desirable, but it may be difficult to arrange during the pressure of work
inevitable at the beginning of the term. An alternative would be for those who
are conducting the seminars to attend the lecture course, but it is unusual for
university teachers to attend lectures given by colleagues to undergraduates.
The growth of a department may also lead to library difficulties, particularly
where the nature of the subject makes it necessary for specialised students to
have access to source material which cannot easily be duplicated.

81. It is, however, on the pastoral and administrative side rather than on that
of' teaching in the strict sense that the effects of growth of a department are
most adverse. Things which in a small department get done without anybody
having to consider how they are to get done, in a large department require to
be organised. Administration necessarily takes up more time, and academic life
tends to become more formalised and impersonal. In particular, the interchange

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

of information about a student’s progress becomes more laborious, and tlie
head of the department, who can be a paterfamilias to his students when they
are relatively few, inevitably knows less and less about them as individuals as
their numbers grow.

82. The difficulties which arise for a department when it has to do service
teaching do not increase with its size, but may well increase with an increase in
the numbers of students in the departments for which the service teaching is
given. Service teaching is generally given to students who require only a limited
knowledge of the department’s subject as a foundation or tool for the study of
some other subject, e.g. Chemistry with a view to Medicine, Mathematics with
a view to Engineering, Russian with a view to reading scientific literature in
that language. In some cases such teaching must be given in the department of
the ancillary subject; in others the alternative may be open of giving it in the
department of the main subject, e.g., of teaching the Mathematics necessary for
a branch of Engineering in the Engineering Department. The latter arrangement
may not always be practicable, but when it is it has two advantages. First, it
makes it easier to ensure that the content of what is taught in the ancillary
subject is appropriate to the purpose for which it is taught, and that it is taught
at the right stage in the study of the main subject. Secondly, it relieves the
department of the ancillary subject from having to give elementary teaching to
students in whom it cannot feel much interest. Such teaching is sometimes
regarded as a rather uninteresting duty. To claim a total exemption from such
duties would be unreasonable, but a department in which they form an undue
proportion of the work, and in which the proportion of honours and post-
graduate work is therefore low, may find it difficult to recruit staff of satisfactory
calibre.

83. We now pass to the questions which arise when the courses of students
cover two or more subjects which are the fields of separate departments. We
asked universities whether it was found that the supervision of students following
such courses set a special problem, and if so how it was met. The multi-subject
courses which are most difficult to supervise are those in three or more subjects
in which all the subjects taken are of equal standing, and which arc followed by
unallocated’* students and by students working for ordinary degrees at some
universities. In universities organised on a departmental basis the responsibility
for a student engaged on such a course is equally shared between three or more
departments each with an equal claim on his time. Joint honours courses
nominally involve a similar division of responsibility, but since such courses
are usually in two subjects only, the difficulties are correspondingly les.s. There
are also a number of courses comprising one principal subject and one or more
subsidiary subjects. Here the responsibility for the student is centred in the
department of the principal subject, and the difficulties caused by shared
responsibility do not arise.

84. Even if the supervision of multi-subject courses is only seriously un-
satisfactory where students have not been admitted to honours courses and are
studying three or more equally rated subjects, the proportion of students affected
is substantial. Of our sample of 3,374 non-medical students, 441 (13-1 per cent)
were reading for pass degrees and 426 (12-6 per cent) were unallocated. These
two groups thus together constitute just over a quarter of the sample, and the
majority of them were probably reading three or more equally rated subjects.

* See Chapter I, para. 23, and Chapter II, para. 49.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

85. The answers given by universities to our question showed that the existence
of the problems to which it referred is generally recognised at non-collegiate
universities where some students follow courses in three or more equally rated
subjects, and where there is a tradition of departmental autonomy. There are,
however, a few universities where these conditions are found which do not
recognise the resulting problems, and elsewhere there are variations in the
importance attached to them and in the success with which they seem to have
been met. One university confessed that while they were aware of a problem
here the tradition of departmental autonomy had not made it possible for them
to solve it.

86. There are two aspects to be considered, the administrative and the human.
On the administrative side it is necessary, by interdepartmental agreement, by
prescription at faculty level, or even, where courses overlap faculties, by inter-
faculty co-ordination, to ensure that the demands made on the student by the
various departments are not in the aggregate excessive, and that his timetable
is satisfactory; and it cannot be regarded as satisfactory unless it is not only
practicable but reasonably convenient. It is not simply a question of avoiding
clashes in the times of lectures and classes. The student should not, for example,
have to write three essays in one week and none in the next, or find himself
with short blank periods in the morning which it is difficult for him to put to
profitable use. If such difficulties are to be minimised, carefully co-ordinated
plans of study are required, and it may be necessary to limit the combinations
of subjects which students can take at the same time. If students are to use their
time to best advantage, they must be given a framework which makes it possible
for them to do so. When students are following multi-subject courses different
views may be formed of their progress by teachers of different subjects. Tliis
point was only mentioned by two universities and this may be because such
differences only come to light where steps are taken to form a view of the
student’s progress as a whole.

87. The administrative difficulties can at least be mitigated by assigning each
student to one member of staff for advice on his studies as a whole, and this
step has been taken by most universities. This member of staff can see the student
and discuss with him the subjects he should take, advising him to avoid com-
binations which are educationally unsuitable or which could involve timetable
difficulties. He can also co-ordinate the reports of teachers in the various
departments on the student’s progress.

88. Each student in our sample was asked whether he was officially assigned
in the current term to one or more people whose function it was to organise
his course of studies or advise him on it, e.g., a tutor, supervisor, regent, or
director of studies. Overall, 78 per cent of the answers were ‘yes’ but the
proportion among pass students was lower (71 per cent) and among unallocated
students not significantly higher (80 per cent). It may be that these proportions
understate the extent to which students have been assigned to members of staff
for advice on their studies, but they must represent the impression which the
arrangements have made on students. Of all pass and unallocated students one
in four was under the impression that there was no one who was responsible
for his course as a whole. This cannot be regarded as satisfactory.

89. If the administrative problems should not be unduly difficult to solve, the
human problem may be more intractable. To enter a university of several
thousand students for the first time may be a rather formidable experience unless

( 90678 )

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

the new student has some smaller unit to which to attach himself. In a few
universities such a unit is found in the college, which often evokes a stronger
lovalty than the university itself Elsewhere the same need is met, for specialised
students by departments, and to some extent by halls of residence for the
minority* who find places in them. But the student who is engaged on a three-
subject course belongs fully to no department. In so far as he belongs to the
three departments concerned with the subjects of his course, he may be conscious
of being a second-class citizen in them, and if he lives in lodgings or at home,
he may find no group in which he is welcome. The union or other student
societies or clubs will no doubt meet the needs of the more extrovert students,
but there are others to whom the impersonality of a large university may be
a serious handicap.

90. To discuss the human problem more fully would take us outside our terms
of' reference, but at a time when larger universities and broader courses are
being advocated, the incompatibility between full departmental autonomy and
the satisfactory conduct of multi-subject courses represents a danger to the
success of university education which in some universities seems to us to require
further study. The human problem is in any case important as the background
to the administrative problem. These problems are, so to speak, the submerged
and the visible parts of a single iceberg. A director of studies whose only contact
with a student is about the organisation of his course, and who may have to
fulfil that function for a large number of students, may not establish with them
a relationship close enough to enable him to give them the help they need. For
this reason it is more satisfactory if the member of staff responsible for a
student’s course also gives him his tutorial teaching on part of it, and at some
universities this dual function is normal. Thus, a faculty in one university
which a few years ago reorganised the teaching of its first-year course in four
subjects gives each student a tutor in each subject, one of whorn acts as his
director of studies. They told us that the task of a director of studies or ‘moral
tutor’ in relation to the first year has been found by trial and error to be
impossible unless he had a ready-made opportunity for weekly ‘business
contacts with his students.

91 Students in our sample who answered ‘yes’ to the question referred to in
para. 88 were asked how often they met for a discussion period a person to
whom they were assigned for the organisation of their course or for advice on it.
Table 3.1 shows, for honours, pass, and unallocated students, the proportions
who said that they were and were not assigned for advice etc., and. of those
who were so assigned, the proportions who at various intervals met for discussion
periods someone to whom they were assigned, called in the table a director of
studies.

92 It seems to us that a student who belongs fully to no department is under
a serious disadvantage, and that if the member of staff to whom he is assigned
for advice is to be at all effective in overcoming this disadvantage, he must see
enough of the student to get to know him well and understand his capabilities
and difficulties. We do not see how he can do this unless he meets the student
for serious discussion at least once a fortnight. It may be, of course, that some
students who see little of the member of the staff directing their course as a

• At universities other than Oxford and Cambridge, 19 per cent of the men and 31 per cent
of the women in 1961-62. These proportions vary widely between one university and another,
and tend to be lower in the larger universities.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 3.1. Frequency of students’ discussion periods
with directors of studies

Type of Course

Honours

Pass

Unallocated

All

Percentage

of Students

Assigned for

^Fortnightly or more

advice, and

often

meeting

Twice a term

director for

Once a term

discussion

Less often or no

answer . .

Not assigned for advice

Number in group

2,359

441

426

3,374

Source: Main Student Survey.

Note: The last column includes 148 students who do not fall within any of the categories
of the other three columns, e.g. those reading for diplomas.

whole receive from others small-group teaching on one or more of the subjects
in their course with sufficient frequency to get to know them well. But unless
there is a tradition of close liaison between teachers who give small-group
teaching in different subjects of the same course, it may be difficult for anyone
to get a student’s problems into perspective. A director of studies who is
responsible for too many students to know any of them well has to rely on
written reports, and these are a poor substitute for the personal knowledge
derived from teaching in discussion periods; nor is a student likely to unburden
himself to one to whom he feels a stranger.

(90678)

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter IV

INTRODUCTION OF STUDENTS TO
UNIVERSITY LIFE

qr Growing up from infancy to maturity is largely a matter of becoming
Indenendent On the mental plane the process of winning independence is slow,
sometimes painful, and not always fully achieved. It might be best if the process
TcZd be a gradual one, but changes of environment and way of life from home
to school and from school to university, are occasions which require rapid
adiustment The second of these transitions comes at a time when the prospective
student has often attained an appearance of maturity which conceals the
continuing immaturity of his mind.

Q4 The magnitude of the leap forward required at this second transition
depends partly on the student’s home environment, and partly on the extent
to which his school has launched him on the process of thinking for himself.
It must therefore vary greatly in individual cases But even at the best, students
coming to a university straight from school find themselves suddenly saddled
with more responsibility for ordering their lives than they have had to take
before’ and in their approach to their subjects many, perhaps most, students
on entry to the university have hardly got beyond the stage of taking then
opinions from authority and expecting to find the ‘right’ answers to all questions
in a text-book. ,

95 Even if the student is not beginning a new subject, he should be beginning
to 'learn a new and more critical approach to the subject he has studied at
school since it is the function of a university education, not simply to equip
the student with expert knowledge, but also, and even more importantly, to
teach him to think for himself, to work on his own, and thus to achieve a
decisive stage of his journey to maturity.

96 The memoranda which we received from the National Unmn of Students
and the Scottish Union of Students both referred to the difficul les of the
transition from school to university. The former referred to the deep gulf
between school and university teaching methods as a factor leading to psycho-
logical disturbances and failure, and emphasised the special need for guidance
at this stage- while the latter said that there was ‘no serious attempt to bridge
the gap between the methods of study used in schools and universities respectively,
or to help the student to adapt himself to university methods. Each memorandum
was as critical of the schools as of the universities in this matter.

97 In view of this evidence it seemed to us that we should try to ascertain
from a sample of individual students how far they had been prepared for the
new phase in their education. Accordingly in the autumn term, 1961, 1»133
first-year university students were asked to complete the questionnaire on this
subject, referred to in para. 5 above, and 1,061 (94 per cent) did so. The

• But see footnote to para. 49. Chapter II. which deals with the repetition at the university
of work done at school.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

questionnaire used in this survey and a memorandum which we circulated to
universities giving its results form Appendices V and VI to this report. In the
following paragraphs we summarise the results more briefly.

98. The main purpose of the inquiry was to find out whether, and if so how,
the students had obtained ‘instruction or advice on the nature of university
work and generally on how to be a university student’, and whether they felt the
need of such advice. The inquiry was conducted by interviews, and interviewers
were given instructions how to construe the words in inverted commas in the
last sentence. It was explained that advice on personal and social conduct in
a new environment did not for our purposes constitute ‘advice’ unless it included
advice on academic matters; neither did the receipt of a syllabus, even if
accompanied by a list of books to be read. We assumed that students would
be informed about the content of their courses; our interest was in advice on
how to set about them. The word ‘advice’ in the paragraphs that follow means
instruction or advice on these matters.

99. Of those in the sample with homes in the United Kingdom (94J per cent),
81 per cent of the men and 85 per cent of the women had been at school in
the United Kingdom in the last 12 months. Of those who were not at school
in the United Kingdom, 64 per cent were in employment and 30 per cent in
other full-time education. Few of the sample had previous university experience.
Of students with homes in the United Kingdom who were at school there in
the previous year, 47 per cent of the men and 62 per cent of the women said
that they received advice at school, in most cases from school staff. Advice
from other non-university sources before enrolment was received by 8J per cent
of students with homes in the United Kingdom. In about half of these cases,
the advice came from the Local Education Authority.

100. At some universities new students are invited, in most cases through the
Students’ Union, to come up early for advice, an arrangement for which the
University Grants Committee have said that they have ‘nothing but praise.’
Students were accordingly asked whether they were offered an opportunity to
come to the university before formal enrolment in order to receive advice. The
replies to this question show that the question was not everywhere understood,
because the small proportion of affirmative replies from Oxford and Cambridge
students is not compatible with known facts. At other universities 58 per cent
of students said that they had been so invited. Outside Oxford and Cambridge,
such arrangements are most usual at the larger English universities (76 per cent)
and least usual in Scotland (27 per cent). Of those who said that they had been
invited, 88 per cent accepted, which seems to show that the opportunity is
valued. Advice after enrolment was said to have been received by 52 percent
of the sample. Whereas advice before enrolment came equally from students
and university teachers, the latter were the principal source after enrolment.

101. Each student was asked (a) whether there was a person to whom he had
been told to go at regular intervals and from whom he could seek advice, and
(6), if not, whether he had been told to whom to go for such advice if he needed
it. Forty per cent of the sample answered ‘no’ to (a), and 9 per cent answered
‘no’ to both questions. From Oxford and Cambridge alone the percentage
answering ‘no’ to question (a) was as high as 47. This is difficult to account for
in view of the tutorial arrangements at those universities. If the question was

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

misunderstood at Oxford and Cambridge, it may have been misunderstood
elsewhere, and we do not therefore place much reliance on the answers to these
two questions.

102. Finally, each student was asked

(а) whether, in his view, advice was necessary for him; and

(б) whether, if it was, he got it.

Two thirds of the sample answered ‘yes’ to (a), the range of inter-university
variation being from 48 per cent at Oxford and Cambridge to 72 per cent m
Scotland. Of those who answered ‘yes’ to (a), 28 per cent, i.e. 19 per cent of
the whole sample, answered ‘no’ to (&). This proportion was lowest at the
smaller English universities, with 15 per cent, or 10 per cent of the whole sample,
and highest in the Colleges of the University of Wales, with 41 per cent, or
25 per cent of the whole sample.

103. Advice on how to be a university student, given either before or immediately
after the student’s arrival at the university, cannot of course by itself change
him from a schoolboy into a university student. It cannot do more than warn
him that he has a great change to make, and of its general nature. The change
itself can only come as a result of first-hand experience of the new approach
expected of him. It will require an effort on his part, in which he will need help
and encouragement from his teachers, particularly during his first year at the
university.

104. In our questions to universities, we asked what were the main differences,
if any, between the arrangements for supervising or methods of teaching first-
year students and other students, and in particular whether the teaching of
first-year students was apportioned between senior teachers and junior teachers
differently, as a matter of considered policy, from the teaching of students of
later years.

105. On the particular question, it is generally recognised that experienced
teachers are required for students of the first year. In Scotland there has been
a tradition that lectures to the first ordinary class should be given by the professor
himself, and this tradition, though it has ceased to be universal in Scotland,
has certainly influenced practice south of the Border.

106. This tradition, in itself, is excellent, but the position in regard to
individual supervision is less satisfactory. Some universities expressly recognised
the need for special supervision in the first year, but there is no generally accepted
view that first-year students require more tutorial teaching than others, or as to
the size of the group in which it should be given. In some universities the need
to establish a close relation between the first-year student and a tutor is recog-
nised, but in others first-year students participate in discussion periods less often,
and in larger groups, than students of later years.

107. This is partly due to difficulties of organisation. All first-year students
in the universities of Scotland and Wales, and some in the English universities,
study three subjects in the first year. This has the two effects, unfavourable to
individual attention, which we have already mentioned, namely that responsibility
for the student is shared between departments, so that supervision is difficult
to arrange ; and that the first-year class in subjects attracting many students is
often very large, with the consequence that i-esources may be insufficient for
small-group teaching, while teaching by lecture is at its most impersonal.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Apart from these practical diflSculties, however, the fact that first-year students
tend to be less responsive to tutorial teaching, and know too little of their
subjects to participate elfectively in discussion, had led to the view in some
universities that teaching by tutorial and seminar is less suited to them.

108. Before commenting on this, we first examine, statistically, the extent to
which the academic life of first-year students differs from that of other students.
The sample from which the evidence for this comes included 1,153 first-year
students and 2,221 students of other years. The difference in dihgence between
first-year and other students is barely significant ; the median hours worked by
first-year students in the week covered by our survey were just over 36, those
worked by other students amounting to 37. Of first-year students 11 per cent,
but of other students 15 per cent, admitted to less than 25 hours’ work in the
week. More than 50 hours were claimed by 9 per cent of first-year students,
but by 14 per cent of other students. These differences suggest that there may
be rather more uniformity in the performance of first-year students.

109. First-year students spent more time under instruction (median, 14 hours
as against 12|) but less time in private study (21 hours as against 23). Of the
time they spent under instruction 59 per cent, as against 56 per cent for other
students, was spent in lectures, and 26 per cent as against 29 per cent in practical
classes. They also spent slightly less time in discussion groups, 11 per cent as
against 12 per cent. Most of the small balance of time in each group was
represented by written-exercise classes. The time spent in field periods was under
one-half per cent of the whole. Again, these differences are barely significant.

110. First-year students were taught in rather larger groups than other students.
Attendance at lectures with audiences of various sizes is shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1. Lectures attended by first-year and other students

Size of
Audience

First-year Students

Other Students

No. of lectures

No. of student
attendances

No. of lectures

No. of student
attendances

Per cent

Under 5

0-4

5-9 . .

1-6

10-19 . .

20-100 ..

Over 100

100

Source: Main Student Survey.

111. The practical classes attended by first-year students were also larger.
Their attendances at practical classes of 20 and over were 80 per cent of their
attendances at practical classes of all sizes. The corresponding figure for other
students was 59 per cent. Of the time spent by first-year students at discussion
periods, 28 per cent was spent in groups of under 5 and 72 per cent in larger
groups. The corresponding proportions for other students were 37 and 63
respectively.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

112. Each student was asked whether he was assigned to one or more people
to organise his course or advise him on it; and if not, whether he got advice
on his course in some other way. Table 4.2 shows how this question was answered
by first-year and other students.

Table 4.2. Arrangements for advice on course

First-year

Students

Other Students

Per cent

Assigned to one or more people . .

Assigned to no-one, but other arrangements

No arrangements for advice on course

100

Source: Main Student Survey.

Where other arrangements were made for giving advice, these were almost
always in the hands of the department responsible for the subject studied. Of
first-year students 77 per cent and of other students 75 per cent said that adequate
arrangements were made for them to obtain advice on their studied.

113. Students were also asked how often they met for discussion periods with
those to whom they were assigned for advice. This was answered as follows:

Table 4.3. Frequency of discussion periods with someone to whom
assigned for advice

First-year

Students

Other Students

Per cent

Once or more a week

Once a fortnight

Once or twice a term

Less often or, because not assigned, not at all, or
no reply

100

Source: Main Student Survey.

114. This table records only discussion periods attended with someone to
whom the student had been assigned for advice, and is not therefore a complete
record of all discussion periods attended. It is possible, however, to get a
further indication of the frequency with which students meet members of staff
from the answers to the question whether, and if so how often, they prepare
written work in their own time for criticism by a teacher, and how it is treated.
The answers to this question are set out in Table 4.4.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 4.4.(a) Frequency of preparation of written work for criticism

First-year

Students

Other Students

Per cent

Once a week or more often

Once a fortnight

Once or twice a term

Less often or not at all

100

(b) Treatment given to written work

First-year

Students

Other Students

Per cent

Written work

(a) returned with written comment, but not

discussed

(6) discussed in discussion periods . .

(d) other treatment

No written work done for staff criticism . .

100

Source: Main Student Survey,

Thus the proportion of first-year students whose written work gets both written
and oral criticism (58 per cent) is higher than the corresponding proportion of
other students (50 per cent).

115. To summarise, first-year students do get rather more personal supervision
than other students. More of them are assigned to someone for the organisation
of their studies and for advice on them, and they meet those to whom they are
assigned rather more often. Fewer of them say that there are no arrangements
for advising them, and slightly more of them are satisfied with the arrangements
that are made for this purpose. More of them have to produce written work
for criticism at least once a week, and more of them can discuss this written
work with the teacher for whose criticism it was written.

116. On the other hand, aU the teaching which first-year students receive,
whether by lectures, classes, or discussion periods, tends to be in larger groups
than that received by other students. The larger the class, the easier it is for the
student not to emerge as a distinct person to his teacher, and the less the
likelihood of any personal relation between them. To the question whether in
the last week they had spoken* to any member of the academic staff, only
28 per cent of first-year students, compared with 42 per cent of other students,

* ‘Other than in periods of formal instruction and excluding casual remarks and brief
greetings’.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

said ‘yes’. It is perhaps natural that first-year students should know less of their
teachers, and be less known to them, than other students, but the fact that it
is a natural thing does not make it a good thing.

117 The first year is the period of the student’s university career when the
risk of failure is greatest. Of those who had failed by the end of the 1960-61
session in courses which they entered in 1957 in arts, social studies, or pure or
applied science, 42 per cent in pure science and 47 per cent in other courses
failed in their first year*. The causes of first-year failure are of course not always
academic, and to discuss them all would take us beyond our reference, but
there are cases in which failure may be prevented by timely intervention by a
member of the academic staff. This cannot happen unless someone knows the
student and has his confidence.

118. It seems to us to be important that every first-year student should have
opportunities, which he does not have to make for himself, to discuss his
academic problems with a member of staff who is not a stranger to him. In
small departments, particularly where the student’s course is such that he feels
that he belongs to that particular department, such opportunities may arise in
the ordinary course of teaching. Otherwise they require to be organised by
assigning the student to a member of staff for advice on his studies. But this
by itself is not enough. The student may not go to the person to whom he is
assigned unless the meeting is part of his regular routine, and may not unburden
himself to someone whom he feels to be a stranger. For this reason it is best
that the person to whom he is assigned for advice should also be someone whom
he meets regularly in a discussion period. To be effective, staff-student contacts
must be about something, i.e. about some shared activity, and the teacher-learner
relation is the best of all.

119. There is another reason why we consider the discussion period to be
particularly important for first-year students. The first year is the time during
which the student should make his break-through from the mentality of the
schoolboy to that of the university student. We do not think that this can be
done by lectures alone. Lectures have a necessary place in the scheme of teaching,
and the tradition that the Professor should lecture to the first ordinary class is
one the passing of which we should regret. But we do not share the view which
is sometimes heard that lectures are more suitable for first-year students on
account of their immaturity, and that the time for tutorial teaching is in the
later stages of the course.

120. It is said that first-year students are too ignorant of their subject to take
any effective part in discussion, and that they are unresponsive to this kind of
teaching. Unresponsive they may be, but because a student is unresponsive to
this kind of teaching, it does not follow that he does not need it. His unre-
sponsiveness may indeed be a sign of his need. And as to ignorance, no student
should come to a discussion period unprepared. He should be set some work
on the subject to be discussed, and he should therefore be equipped to discuss it.
The danger of relying too much on lectures is that the lecturer represents
authority, so that lectures may tend to perpetuate the immaturity from which
the student should be breaking away. We discuss the respective functions of
the lecture and the discussion period more fully in a later chapter.

* Source: University Grants Comrnittee.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter V

STUDENTS’ USE OF THEIR TIME

121. In this section we give some account of the time which students give to
academic work in term-time, and the way in which their hours of work are
divided between periods under instruction and private study, basing ourselves
on the information about a week between 24th January and 8th March, 1962,
obtained from the main student survey.

122. The median hours of work recorded for that week were 36-7, i.e., the
number of students who worked longer hours was equal to the number who
worked shorter. The upper quartile was 44-4 hours, and the lower quartile
29-5 hours. In other words 25 per cent of students worked for 44-4 hours or
more and 25 per cent worked for 29-5 hours or less. Over 50 hours were
recorded by 11 per cent of students and under 20 hours by 5J per cent. The
dilference of 14- 9 hours separating the upper and lower quartiles was remarkably
uniform through all the groups for which separate figures have been taken out;
the greatest differences being 15-8 hours (Oxford and Cambridge and Scotland)
and the smallest 13-9 hours (applied science at all universities).

123. Table 5.1 shows how hours of work vary between university groups.

Table 5.1. Students’ Hours of Work by University Groups

Oxford

and

Cambridge

London

Other

Larger

Civic

English

Smaller

Civic

Wales

Scotland

All

hours

Lower Quartile

28-3

31-3

28-6

29-0

28-4

31-4

29-5

Median

36'4

38-4

35-2

36-7

35-3

39-0

36-7

Upper Quartile

44-1

46-7

43-2

44-2

43-5

47-2

44-4

Number in Group . .

623

456

1,083

404

240

568

3,374

Source: Main Student Survey.

It will be seen that students of London University and the Scottish universities
worked longer hours than other students. The difference in the balance of
studies between these and other universities is insufficient to account for more
than a small fraction of this difference. The shortest hours were those worked
at the larger civic universities, despite the presence at those universities of a
high proportion (31 per cent compared with an overall average of 20 per cent)
of students of applied science, which, as may be seen from the next table, would
lead one to expect longer hours of work than the general average. The effects
of inter-university differences in the balance of studies are dealt with more
fully below.

124. Table 5.2 shows how hours of work vary between the main faculty groups
and between honours and other students,

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 5.2. Students’ Hours of Work by Faculty and Type of Course

Faculty

Type of Course

Arts

Pure

Science

Applied

Science

Honours

Pass

Un-

allocated

All

hours

Lower Quartile

27-8

30-7

32-9

30-0

26-1

30-0

29-5

35'2

37-7

39-3

37-1

33-9

37-1

36-7

Upper Quartile

43-0

45-0

46-8

44-7

41 -1

44-6

44-4

Number in Group . .

1,706

1,004

664

2,359

441

426

3,374

Source: Main Student Survey.

Note: The term ‘unallocated’ is explained in Chapter I, para. 23 and Chapter II, para. 49.

125. The next point to be considered is how total hours of work are divided
between hours under instruction and private study. The main difference here
is between faculties, as is shown in Table 5.3.

Table 5.3. Median Hours spent under Instruction and in Private Study
by Faculty and Type of Course

Faculty and

Under

Private

All Work

Number in

Type of Course

Instruction

Study

Group

hours

hour-s

Arts:

Honours

9-4

26-4

35-4

1,263

Pass . .

9-9

22-5

32-8

191

Unallocated . .

12-3

21-9

34-0

187

All

10-0

25-2

35-2

1,706

Pure Science:

Honours

17-0

21 -1

38-1

722

Pass . .

16-3

17-4

34*0

136

Unallocated . .

20-7

18-7

39-5

142

All

17-4

19-9

37-7

1,004

Applied Science:

Honours

20-2

19-4

39-3

374

Pass

17-0

17’1

35*8

114

Unallocated . .

22-4

19’3

40-8

All

20-3

19-1

39-3

664

All Faculties:

Honours

12’6

23’4

37-1

2,359

Pass

13-0

19-0

33*8

441

Unallocated , .

16-3

20-2

37'1

426

All

13-2

22-3

36-7

3,374

Source: Main Student Survey.

Notes

1. For reasons that will be familiar to students of statistics, median hours of all work are
not always equal to the total of median hours under instruction plus median hours of private
study.

2. The total numbers of students in each faculty group and in all faculties include certain
students, for example those reading for diplomas, who are not included in the numbers reading
the various kinds of degree course.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

126. Thus scientists spend much longer under instruction than arts students,
applied scientists twice as long. Arts students give longer hours to private study,
but the inter-faculty differences in hours of private study are less than those in
hours under instruction. The shortest hours are worked by pass students, and
in every faculty this is due to the fact that they give less time to private study
than honours students; only in applied science do they get materially less
teaching than honours students. The total hours worked by unallocated students
are as long as those worked by honours students, hut they spend more of their
time under instruction and less in private study. The relatively long hours spent
under instruction by xinallocated students may be due to the fact that a high
proportion of such students are at Scottish universities, where hours of instruction
are long, and where it is normal not to admit students to honours courses before
the end of their second year. In assessing the significance of inter-faculty
differences in hours of private study, it must be remembered that the nature
and intensity of private study vary from subject to subject. For example, a
relatively short period spent in concentrated reasoning on a mathematical
problem may be just as productive, and just as tiring, as a much longer period
spent in reading a literary work relevant to a course in EngUsh.

127. We now show how time under instruction is divided between the various
types of teaching periods, the most significant differences here being those
between faculties.

Table 5.4. Average Hours under Instruction by Faculty and Type of
Teaching Period

Arts

Pure

Science

Applied

Science

All Faculties

Hours

Per

cent

Hours

Per

cent

Hours

Per

cent

Hours

Per

cent

Lectures

6-8

8-3

10-7

8*0

Written-Exercise Classes

0-4

0-3

0-5

Practical Classes

0-5

7-7

6-9

3-9

Field Periods . .

0-0

0-2

0-1

Tutorials

0-8

0-5

0-2

0-6

Seminars

1-6

0-5

0-7

All Teaching . .

lO-l

100

17-4

100

19-8

100

14-2

100

Source: Main Student Survey.

Notes

1. The differences between the faculty totals in this table and the corresponding figures
in the previous table are due to the fact that the figures in this table are averages and not
medians as in the previous table.

2. The short time spent in field periods may be due to the fact that the survey related to a
week between late January and early March.

3. Apparent discrepancies in the totals in the second and third columns are the result of
approximation.

128. The differences between pass students and honours students in the
distribution of time under instruction between kinds of teaching period are not
great, and are doubtfully significant, except that the former get only half as

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

much time in tutorials as the latter. The longer hours spent under instruction
by unallocated students in the field of arts are mainly given to lectures, but m
the field of science, pure and applied, they are equally attributable to longer
practical classes.

129 We have now to deal with the way in which the time spent under
instruction, and its distribution between kinds of teaching period, varies between
one university group and another. This is a complex matter because these
variations are only partly due to differences in teaching method and organis ation
between one university and another ; they are also due to some extent to differences
in the balance of studies. Thus, average hours spent under instruction by students
at Oxford and Cambridge are shorter than those so spent elsewhere, but this
is partly due to the fact that at these universities the proportion of arts students
is higher than elsewhere. It is possible to eliminate the effect of diffcieiices in
the balance of studies by working out what the hours of instruction in a
university group would be if students of each faculty in the group received the
same amount of teaching as students of the same faculty in the country as a
whole. The result we call the ‘standardised average’ hours of instruction for
the group and it can be compared directly with the actual average hours of
instruction for the group to give a difference which is due solely to variations in
teaching method. In the same way we can ascertain a standardised avci age
of the time spent by students of each university group in each type of teaching
period.

130. For example, applying the national hours of instruction in various
faculties to the distribution of Oxford and Cambridge students between faculties
gives an average of 12-72 hours. This is the standardised average for Oxford
and Cambridge. Then:

(1) Actual average, all universities 14- 10 hours

(2) Standardised average, Oxford and Cambridge . . 12-72 hours

(3) Actual average, Oxford and Cambridge .. 10-58 hours

Comparing actual figures (1) and (3), we find that hours under instruction at
Oxford and Cambridge are shorter by 3J hours than the average for all
universities. This reflects the fact that Oxford and Cambridge differ from other
universities in two ways, in the distribution of students between faculties and
in the amount of instruction received faculty by faculty. The introduction of
the standardised average (2) enables us to separate the two factors. The influence
of the particular balance of studies at Oxford and Cambridge, where the
proportion of arts students is higher than elsewhere, is shown in the comparison
of (1) and (2). We are more interested in the extent to which the amount of
instruction faculty by faculty is lower at Oxford and Cambridge than in all
universities, the difference between (2) and (3). These two averages have one
balance of studies (that of Oxford and Cambridge) in common; they differ in
that (2) is an average of national hours of instruction and (3) the actual average
hours at Oxford and Cambridge. By the elimination of the effect of varying
distribution of students by faculties, the ‘crude’ difference of 3 J hours is reduced
to the ‘standardised’ difference of a little more than 2 hours. Comparisons of
this kind for each university group and for each type of teaching period, as
well as for total hours under instruction, hours of private study, and all hours
of -work, are made in Tables 5.5 and 5.6.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 5.5. Average hours spent in principal teaching periods
by students of various university groups

Lectures

Written

Exercise

Classes

Practicals

Tutorials

Seminars

All these
Teaching
Periods

hours

Oxford and Cambridge :

Standardised average . .

7-56

0-42

2-86

0-65

1-23

12-72

Actual . . . .

6-30

0-24

2-09

1-54

0-41

10-58

Difference

-1-26

-0-18

-0-77

+0‘89

-0-82

-2-14

London:

Standardised average . .

8*07

0-48

4-02

0-55

1-08

14-20

Actual

7-84

0-80

3-80

0-43

1-52

14-39

Difference

-0-23

+0-32

-0-22

-0-12

-hO-44

+0-19

Larger Civic:

Standardised average . .

8-48

0-57

4-57

0-50

0-99

15-11

Actual

8-26

0-59

4-76

0-33

15-13

Difference

-0-22

+0-02

-h0'19

-0-17

+0-20

+0-02

Smaller Civic:

Standardised average . .

7-60

0-39

3-40

0-63

1-14

13-16

Actual , .

7-81

0-25

3-07

0-45

1-23

12-81

Difference

-I-0-21

-0-14

-0-33

-0-18

+ 0-09

-0-35

PVales:

Standardised average . .

8-03

0-47

4-10

0-56

1-05

14-21

Actual

8-44

0-40

4-66

0-39

1-01

14-90

Difference

-h0'41

-0-07

+ 0-56

-0-17

-0-04

+0-69

Scotland:

Standardised average . .

8-22

0-54

4-03

0-53

1-08

14-40

Actual

9-80

0-58

4-55

0-20

16-32

Difference

H-1-58

+0-04

+0-52

-0-33

+0-11

+ 1-92

Ail Universities:

Actual

8-05

0-49

3-90

0-56

1-09

14-10

Source: Main Student Survey.

Notes

1. Differences are marked plus when the actual is higher, minus when it is lower, than the
■ standardised average.

2. The figures in this table and Table 5.6, differ from those in tables 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3. This is
due to the fact that the figures in these tables are averages and those in the earlier tables are
medians.

3. Tutorial’ means a discussion period attended by four or fewer students; ‘seminar’ means
one attended by five or more students. For a discussion of the differences between these forms
of teaching, see Chapter VII, Section (ii).

131. The standardised averages of Table 5.5 show that two university groups
differ significantly from others. The amount of instruction received at Oxford
and Cambridge is rather more than 2 hours less than the national amount.
Most of the difference is due to less time in lectures (1|- hours) and in praoticals
(f hour). Discussion periods occupy about the same time of Oxford and
Cambridge students as of university students elsewhere, but more of the time
is spent in tutorial groups of up to four students. The other university group
which differs widely is Scotland where hours under instruction (in a standardised

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 5.6 Average hours spent in all teaching periods and in private
study by students of various university groups

All Teaching
Periods

Private

Study

All Work

Number
in Group

Hours

Students

Oxford and Cambridge:
Standardised average

Actual

Difference

12-77

10-63

-2-14

23-60
25-51
+ 1-91

36-37

36-14

-0-23

623

London:

Standardised average

Actual

Difference

14-27

14-43

+0-16

23- 60

24- 44
+0-84

37- 87

38- 87
+ 1-00

456

Larger Civic:

Standardised average

Actual

Difference

15-20
15-22
+ 0-02

22-28

20-93

-1-35

37-48

36-15

-1-33

1,083

Smaller Civic:

Standardised average

Actual

Difference

13-20

12-87

-0-33

23-50

23-78

+0-28

36-70

36-65

-0-05

404

Wales:

Standardised average

Actual

Difference

14- 27

15- 00
+0-73

22-92

21-76

-1-16

37-19

36-76

-0-43

240

Scotland:

Standardised average

Actual

Difference . .

14-47
16-39
+ 1-92

22- 87

23- 23
+ 0-36

37-34

39-62

+2-28

568

All Universities:

Actual

14-17

23-04

37-21

3,374

Source: Main Student Survey.

Note

\ Table 5 5 does not include field periods, which account on average for 0; 07 hotirs, with
a ranee of 0- 04 to 0-10 The appropriate amounts for field periods have been included m this
taSefnd tte ac?oun s for S between the final column of figums m Table 5.5 and

the co“mn heSed ‘All Teaching Periods’ in this table. See also notes to Table 5.5.

comparison) are 2 hours longer than elsewhere. IJ hours more in lectures and

1 hour more in practicals. In Scotland discussion periods tend to be held m
larger groups than elsewhere.

132. Figures of hours under instruction for each of four fh^ulty groups
(separating arts into humanities and social studies) are available forjach
university group, and bring out certain features which are masked m all-faculty
figures. For example, while hours under instruction at Oxford and Cambridge
were shorter than the national average in all faculty groups, m humanities they
were shorter by 3 hours (amounting to only 7-1 hours), m applied science by

2 hours, and in social studies and pure science by an hour or less. Arts students
at Oxford and Cambridge actually spent less time in discussion periods than

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

the national average, though over three-quarters of this time was in tutorials*
as against the national average of one-third. It is because their scientists (pure
and applied) get more of this form of teaching, and particularly of tutorials,
that the average time spent by Oxford and Cambridge students in discussion
periods is, if anything, longer than elsewhere.

133. In the University of London, students of humanities and social studies
spent 3-0 hours and 3-4 hours respectively in discussion periods. Of this time
2-2 hours and 3-0 hours respectively were spent in seminars,* and this is why
the average time spent in seminars at Loirdon University was longer than
elsewhere. In Scotland, while hours under instruction are above average in all
faculties, they are longest in applied science, where they reach 23-9 hours,
4 hours longer than average and 6-8 hours longer than the corresponding
figure for Oxford and Cambridge.

134. It is sometimes said that too much of students’ time is occupied in receiving
instruction and attending laboratories, leaving them with insufficient time for
reading and other activities, and therefore we asked each university whether it,
or any of its colleges or faculties, had considered as a matter of policy how
many hours a week a student should spend receiving instruction and attending
laboratories. Universities recognise a problem here, more severe in laboratory
subjects than in library subjects, and in multi-subject courses than in single-subject
courses. When a student’s course is centred in one main subject, the department
responsible for the subject can arrange for such hours as it considers suitable,
allowing for the claims of any subsidiary subjects. It is where a student’s course
covers more than one subject, and particularly when it covers more than two,
and where each subject has an equal claim on his time, that difficulties can,
and sometimes do, arise. It is the exception for this matter to require regulation
by the university itself, though at Cambridge the General Board has concerned
itself with the load imposed on students by the Natural Sciences Tripos Part I
(two subjects and two half-subjects), and Birmingham, Keele, and Nottingham
have also given guidance to their faculties. The more usual arrangement is for
this to be covered by faculty or inter-departmental arrangements. For laboratory
subjects the most usual limit is 24 or 25 hours. For other subjects it is 12 hours.

135. The main student survey provides some evidence of the extent to which
these figures are exceeded. Over 12 hours were spent under instruction by about
30 per cent of arts students, and 15 or more by II J per cent. On the other hand
only 1 per cent spent as many as 20 hours. For science students the facts are
shown in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7. Hours under Instruction of Science Students

Pure Science

Applied Science

Proportion under instruction for:

Per cent

20 or more hours

25 or more hours

30 or more hours

Number in group

1,004

664

Source: Main Student Survey.

Note: The figures in the top line include those in the other lines, and those in the second
line include those in the third.

* See Note 3 to Table 5.5.

(90678) D

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

136 The longest hours spent under instruction by scientists were in Scotland
where taking pure and applied science together, 61 per cent spent 20 hours
or more and 27 per cent spent 25 hours or more. In the smaller civic universities
"^spending figures were as low as 32 per cent and 11 per cenT Sa—
hours under instruction were also below average at Oxford

while in London and the larger civic universities they were not far fiom the

national average.

137 A question which suggested itself at this point was whether the hours
riven to reading would be increased if less teaching were given, and we therefore
Obtained, for each of our three main faculty groups, figures showing Itow hours
spent under instruction were related to hours of private study. The results are
shown briefly in Table 5.8.

Table 5.8. Median Hours of Private Study by Hours under Instruction

Hours under
Instruction

Arts

Science

Number of
Students

Median Hours
of Private
Study

Number of
Students

Median Hours
of Private
Study

Under 5

5 to under 10 . .
10 to under 15 . .
15 to under 20 . .
20 to under 25 . .
25 to under 30 . .
Over 30

184

676

649

180

} -
3

24-8

26-3

24-5

(16-2)

not available

38
147
339
447

/ 426

\. 232

(26-7)

21-9

20-9

19-4

18-6

18-9

(21-9)

Number in
faculty group

1,706

1,668

Source: Main Student Survey.

138. Table 5.8 does not point in any definite direction,* and the reason may be
that two opposing tendencies are at work. It may be that for students of an
equal degree of diligence a reduction in the hours for which they were expected
to attend classes would tend to produce an increase in the hours which they
would give to private study; but all students are not equally diligent, and to
the extent that the more conscientious both attend more classes and also spend
more time on the reading advised to them, there may be a tendency for longer

hours of instruction and longer hours of private study to go together.

• The correlation coefficient between hours of private study and hours spent under inslruction
is as low as 0- 17.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter VI

STUDENT OPINION

1 39. Our main sources of information about the views of students on teaching
methods were the memoranda which we received from the National Union of
Students and the Scottish Union of Students, together with memoranda which
the University Grants Committee had received from student organisations during
their last general visitation of the universities, and made available to us on our
appointment. These memoranda came from students at nearly all universities
(but not from Oxford or Cambridge) and with few exceptions they discuss
teaching methods at greater or less length.

140. There is also available a considerable amount of statistical information
based on surveys of student opinion as to teaching methods, apart from that
obtainable from the main student survey. The memoranda furnished to the
University Grants Committee in 1961 included a survey carried out in that year
by the Student Representative Council of Sheffield University with the assistance
of staff from the Departments of Social Studies and Statistics, in which a
97 per cent response was obtained from a random sample of one-sixth of the
students (472 out of 486). We were also furnished with a survey of teaching
methods conducted in 1962 with a view to our inquiry by students at Nottingham
University, in which a random sample of 81 students (one in thirty) was
questioned. Information on student opinion is also obtainable from the interim
report on Students’ Experience of University, prepared by Mr. Peter Marris for
the Institute of Community Studies. This report was based on interviews in the
winter of 1961-62 with samples of students from three universities. In all
315 students, whose names were drawn at random from lists of final-year
students, were approached, and 294 were interviewed, 112 from Cambridge,
86 from Leeds, and 96 from Southampton.

141. The general tenor of the student memoranda is very similar. It is highly
critical of the lecture. The principal desiderata are fewer and better lectures,
closer staff-student relations, and more teaching by tutorial and seminar. There
are two strands in the criticism of the lecture. The first is that too much
emphasis is placed on lectures as a method of teaching: the second is that the
quality of some lectures is lower than it should be.

142. In the memoranda submitted to the University Grants Committee the
lecture is criticised as being out-dated, owing to the existence of satisfactory
text-books in most fields of study, and as being a ‘one-way’ process, establishing
no contact between lecturer and student, and incapable of ‘stimulating academic
discussion of any value’. The remark in one of these memoranda, that it is
‘difficult for a lecturer to answer students’ questions and illuminate their
misunderstandings in a corridor during a five- or ten-minute break between
lectures’, illustrates the weakness of lectures as a sole method of teaching, if
not supplemented by opportunities for discussion between teacher and student.

143. In the memoranda which we received from the two national unions the

(90678) D2

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

criticism of the lecture was on similar lines. The major criticisms of the National
Union of Students, were, first, that the lecture is not capable of allowing a full
discussion of points of interest, and secondly, that it is all too frequently used
to communicate matter adequately covered in readily available texts. The
Scottish Union of Students say that far too much detail is given in lecture
courses, with the result that in many courses an adequate set of notes enables
a student to pass all examinations. This they describe as ‘spoon-feeding at its
worst’.

144. The criticism that a lecture is not capable of allowing a full discussion
of points of interest calls for some comment. This is indeed a recognised
limitation of the lecture as such. A lecture should of its nature be an orderly,
balanced, and continuous exposition of its subject by the lecturer, and derives
its value from being such an exposition. A few questions can be allowed,
particularly at the end, but the extent to which interruptions can be allowed
must be strictly limited if the lecture is not to lose the quality which gives it its
value. Certainly notliing like a full discussion of points of intere.st to members
of the audience is possible without turning the lecture into a seminar. We think
that this is probably recognised by the students, and that when they criticise
the lecture as being a one-way process, they are not asking for lecture.s of a
different kind, but for fewer lectures and more teaching by tutorial and seminar,

145. In both memoranda there is recognition of the value of certain types of
lecture, e.g., ‘to outline the general direction which .studies may be expected
to take, and to correlate material which has recently been published’, and the
stimulative effect of lectures about recent research, or about a special subject
on which the lecturer is himself working, is acknowledged. But both also express
the view that students are expected to attend too many lectures, that lectures
are too much used to present detailed information which could readily be
obtained from books or other printed sources, and that the time occupied in
attending such lectures would be better employed in the library.

146. Turning to the second strand in the criticism of the lecture, namely, that
the quality of some lectures is lower than it should be, we have already referred
to the complaint that some lectures contain too much detail and needlessly
duplicate available texts. Apart from this the National Union of Students say
that lectures are ‘frequently ill-prepared and badly presented’, as a remedy for
which both unions advocate courses of training for newly appointed teachers,
a matter on which we comment later in this report. They do not describe in
detail the faults of which they complain.

147. More information, however, about the shortcomings found by students
in their lectures can be derived from the report of the Marris inquiry, in which
students were asked to describe the qualities which distinguish good lectures
from bad. The question was so put as not to suggest any particular qualities.
Points of delivery, such as audibility, speed of diction, and legibility of what
is written on the blackboard, were mentioned by 44 per cent of those questioned,
quoting examples of lecturers who were at fault in these matters. Clarity and
order were mentioned by 42 per cent, and interest by 36 per cent. By ‘interest’
the students meant that the lecturer should seem interested in his subject and
avoid giving the impression that lecturing bores him. ‘In students’ eyes’ research
did cot so much maintain the vitality of a university department, as debase
teaching to an unwelcome duty perfunctorily performed’. Ease of note-taking

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

was mentioned by 28 per cent of those questioned, particularly by scientists,
by which was meant the intelligent use of the blackboard and the typewritten
hand-out. Originality was demanded by 20 per cent, almost all non-scientists.
Other qualities mentioned by at least 20 per cent were that lectures should be
comprehensible and provide guidance for further study.

148. Both the memoranda furnished to us by the national unions, and a
number of those addressed to the University Grants Committee by students at
individual universities, express the view that lectures should not be compulsory.
Among the points made are that compulsory attendance is incompatible with
the students’ academic freedom, that not all students profit from attending
lectures, and that the quality of lectures should be sufficiently high to ensure
attendance. ‘Some lectures deserve to be missed’. We shall return to this point.

149. The Scottish Union of Students specifically state that the time saved by
reducing the number of lectures should be devoted to other kinds of teaching,
and particularly tutorials. The National Union of Students also emphasise the
importance of providing tutorial teaching for all students. They consider,
however, that the number of weekly hours committed to organised teaching of
all kinds is in some cases excessive, and that in these cases a reduction in the
load of lectures would also be of value in reducing the total number of hours
so committed, and in allowing students more time for private study and for
participation in the life of the university community.

150. There is little comment about practical classes in the memoranda sub-
mitted to us, and this is remarkable in view of the time spent by students of
science in such classes, averaging 7-4 hours per week for all such students. The
memorandum from the National Union of Students is wholly silent about these
classes. The Scottish Union of Students consider that practical classes in some
courses place too much emphasis on technique, students being left to follow
printed instructions unintelligently, without being given sufficient opportunity
to tackle problems on their own.

151. The National Union of Students conclude their memorandum with the
remark that in preparing their statement it has been disheartening to come
across writings and reports by persons of importance in the university world
expressing, sometimes many years ago, ideas similar to those which they are
now putting forward. It is indeed a fact that the views now put forward by the
student organisations do not differ much, in their main outline, from those
expressed in the paragraphs on ‘The Relation between Student and Teacher’
in the report of the University Grants Committee for the period from 1929-30
to 1935-36. In that report the Committee said that they had had a number of
representations from students that they were made to attend too many lectures.
The Committee themselves expressed the view that ‘the lecture may sometimes
bulk disproportionately in the whole body of instruction which the student
receives’, and said that ‘lectures might be fewer and need not be compulsory if
a greater use could be made of the seminar or tutorial system’. The Committee
added that they believed that they were voicing general university opinion, and
that the universities had set their faces in this direction and were only prevented
from making further progress by financial limitations.

152. We now turn to the statistical evidence about student opinion. We would
first draw attention to one difference between the main student survey and the
other surveys referred to in para. 5. In the former each respondent was asked

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

tn nnswer ‘ves’ or ‘no’ to the question whether he would like any changes made
n the amount of time he spent receiving various types of teachmg, and only
those who answered ‘yes’ to this question were asked what changes m particular
fterwould like This two-stage approach was, we believe, peculiar to the mam
stuLnt survey and could produce a different result from that of putting
questions about particular teaching methods without a general
question. Some of those who said ‘no’ to the preliminary question ‘ ^e 1
have given a positive answer about a particular change if they had not, y i i
reply to the preliminary question, disqualified themselves from doing so.

153 In the main student survey nearly two-thirds of the students said ‘yes’

to the preliminary question whether they would like a change of some ort
The desire for change was greatest in the larger civic univeisities ^ England
and in the Scottish universities (70 per cent) and least at Oxford and 'dg^

(50 per cent). As between faculty groups there was least demand foi change
humanities (61 per cent) and most in science (68 per cent).

154 The view that students think they have to attend too many lectures is

barely borne out by the surveys of student opinion. In the t

36 per cent of those who said that they wanted some change (i.e. 24 pei cent ot
all who answered the preliminary question) wanted it m the time spc'd
lectures, and a third of this minority wanted more time in lectures. Thus those
who expressed a desire for less time in lectures were no more than 6 pet cent
of all who answered the preliminary question. This 16 per cent falls to J per
cLt among students of pure science, but rises to 25 per cent among students
of applied science, a difference which may be related to the fact *^1" die
week covered by the survey the average student of applied science spent 10| liouis
in lectures, nearly 2i hours more than the average student of pure science.

155 There are also some interesting variations between university gioups in
the percentage of students who want less time in lectures. Here there is no clear
relationship between the percentages of students in any university group who
want less time in lectures, and the average time spent in lectures in that gioup.
The percentage is lowest at Oxford and Cambridge, where least time is spent at
lectures- but one of the groups in which the next lowest percentage is found is
Scotland where most time is spent in lectures. Table 6.1 compares by university
groups the proportions of students wishing for less time m lectures with the
average time so spent.

Table 6.1. Students wishing for less time in lectures

University Group

Percentage wishing for
less time in lectures

Average hours
spent in lectures

Oxford and Cambridge . .

121

6-3

London

7-8

Larger Civic

Smaller Civic

Wales

8-4

Scotland

9*8

AH Universities . .

8-1

Source: Main Student Survey.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

156. In all the unofficial surveys of student opinion students were asked, in
slightly varying terms, whether they wished for an increase, a reduction, or no
change, in the number of lectures they were expected to attend, and the results,
given in Table 6.2, are not dissimilar from those of the main student survey.

Table 6.2. Changes desired in lectures by students at certain universities

Cambridge

Leeds

Southampton

Sheffield

Nottingham

All five
Universities

Per cent

No change . .

More . .

Fewer

121

Other response

100

Number in

sample

112

472

847

Sources: Surveys referred to in para. 5.

Note: The Nottingham figures refer to ‘main lectures’ only. There was actually a majority
in favour of more lectures on subjects other than those covered by the main course.

Thus at all universities the majority of students appear to be satisfied with the
time they are expected to give to lectures, and though the number wanting
fewer lectures exceeds that wanting more, the majority in favour of fewer
lectures is by no means overwhelming, and instances can even be found where
more lectures would be welcomed.

157. In the main student survey students were asked whether they would wish
to see some increase in discussion periods if this meant a reduction in the number
and range of lectures offered. Opinion was very evenly divided on this point.
Of the 96 per cent who expressed an opinion, 47 per cent said ‘yes’, and 49 per
cent ‘no’. There is no clear relationship between the way in which this question
is answered and the time spent in lectures. Thus among students of humanities
the highest proportion of ‘yes’ answers comes from Scotland (54 per cent)
where 8 • 5 hours are spent in lectures, but the next highest proportion comes
from Oxford and Cambridge (53 per cent) where 4-7 hours are so spent, the
average for the faculty group being 6-8 hours. The group who spend most
time in lectures are students of applied science in Scotland, with an average of
13-1 hours, but only 40 per cent of them were prepared to accept a reduction
in the number and range of lectures offered as the price of more teaching by
discussion. Again, the time spent in lectures by first-year students (9-0 hours)
is longer than that spent by other students (7-5 hours) but first-year students,
with 46 per cent of ‘yes’ answers and 51 per cent of ‘no’, seem if anything to
be less willing than others for a reduction in the time so spent.

158. If the support given hy the student surveys to the views of the two
national unions on the subject of lectures is somewhat equivocal, there is no
question but that those unions, in asking for an increase in teaching by tutorial
and seminar, were expressing the views of their constituents. Not merely was
there more support for an increase in tutorials and seminars than there was for

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

■ 1 * tiip number of those actually desiring a reduction

Table 6.3. Demand for more or less teaching by Tutorial or Seminar

Have such periods and want more
Do not have such periods and want some

Total wanting more .

Have such periods and want less
Want no change or no answer

Tutorials

Seminars

Per cent

100

Source: Main Student Survey.

1 SQ The inter-faculty variations in demand are not great, the greatest demand
for more of each kind of discussion period coming from students ot .soca
!?udks fSO oercent for more tutorials and 34 per cent for more seminars) and
the east from (43 per cent for more tutorials and 31 per cent for more

seminars'! As regards variations between university groups, it is icmaikable
seminars). AS legar , ^ students receive tutorial

teachiM and°receive more of it than students elsewhere, 27 per cent still want
mom At oth the proportions asking for more tutorial teaching

? t Irv rreatlv ranging from 48 to 52. The greatest demand for more
tmtats comes from Scotland (40 per cent) and the least from Oxford and

16™ The unofficial surveys show, in general, an even stronger demand (possibly
w;heveLon suggested in para. 152) for more teaching by tutorial and seminar.
Of the Sheffield sample, 23 per cent wanted no change in the number of tutorials
Sfd semSrtaM^^^^ 73 per cent wanted more, and 4 per cent wan ed
fewer At Nottingham 83 per cent said ‘yes’
question whether they wanted more tutorials

about tutorials alone produced a similar response. Students at lh=
universities covered by the Marris inquiry answered a question about tutori
alone as shown in Table 6.4.

Table 6.4. Change in tutorials desired by students at certain
universities

Cambridge

Leeds

Southampton

Percentage desiring;
No change
More
Fewer

Other response

Per cent

100

Source: Marris inquiry.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Replies to a similar question about seminars were complicated by the fact that
a considerable proportion of those questioned had no experience of this form
of teaching. Of those already attending them a considerable proportion wanted
more and very few wanted a reduction.

161. It is worth remarking that as majorities of students questioned in these
surveys desired no change in the number of lectures and an increase in the
number of tutorials and seminars, there must be some doubt whether the
National Union of Students, in advocating a reduction in the total number of
hours committed to organised teaching, are reflecting the views of their con-
stituents. But it should not be inferred, from the fact that we raise this doubt,
that we disagree with the view of the Union. Their view is probably that of the
more mature and thoughtful members of the student body.

162. As might be expected from the absence of comment, the main student
survey shows little demand for a change in the hours given to practical classes.
The question principally affects students of science. Of these 16 per cent would
like to spend less time in practicals. The minority who would like to spend more
is greater among students of applied science (12 per cent) than among students
of pure science (5 per cent), and this difference may be related to the fact that
the latter spend longer (7J hours a week) in practicals than the former (7 hours).
But the great majority in either field are content with practical hours as they
are. There are some variations of opinion between university groups. The
proportion of students who have practical classes and would like less of them
varies between 29 per cent at Oxford and Cambridge and 16 per cent in
Scotland. In Scotland 20 per cent of students who have practicals would like
more of them. Scotland is the only university group in which there is a balance
of opinion in favour of more practicals. This difference between Oxford and
Cambridge on the one hand and Scotland on the other is unexpected since
science students at the former spend over 2 hours a week less in practical classes
than those at the latter.

163. There is not a great deal of interest in written-exercise classes or field
periods. Of those who have written-exercise classes roughly half are content
with the time now given to them; of those who would like a change those who
would like more are twice as numerous as those who would like less. Such
interest as is shown in field periods comes from students of applied science.
Of applied scientists who have such periods about half are content with the
time now given to them, but of the others the overwhelming majority would
like more of them. Of applied scientists who do not have such periods, 37 per
cent would like some.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter VII

LECTURES AND DISCUSSION PERIODS

(i) LECTURES

164. We included in our questions to universities some designed to elicit their
views on the respective functions of lectures and discussion periods (tutoi idl or
seminar) in the scheme of teaching. We also, in our questionnaire to a sample
of university teachers, asked each respondent whether, consideiing their courses
as a whole, he thought that the students in whose teaching he took part got
too much, the right amount, or not enough teaching by lectures oi by other
methods respectively. He was asked to answer this question scpaiately foi
specialised and unspecialised students.’^ In the next paragraphs we summarise
the views thus obtained.

165. Though here and there traces may be found of the view, held by no less
a person than Dr. Johnson,! that lectures became obsolete with the invention of
printing, the overwhelming weight of opinion in the replies received from
universities is that the lecture has an essential function, and could not be replaced
by reading combined with teaching by discussion. At most universities the
lecture remains in most subjects the main vehicle for instruction, and the
tutorial or seminar fulfils a secondary role. It should not, however, be assumed
that where lectures are the main vehicle for instruction reading is not required.
It is the exception for lectures to provide students with all the material they need
for a good working knowledge of the subject. The normal practice is to cover
the syllabus with lectures only in broad scope and principle, with only such
illustrations as are needed to make the principles understood. Consequently
extensive reading is usually required round the framework so provided. As one
university put it, the student comes to the university to read lor a degree, not
to be lectured into one.

166. Two out of every three of the teachers who replied to our questionnaire
were satisfied with the amount of lecturing given to their students, whether
specialised or non-specialised. Most of those who were not satisfied considered
that students got too much lecturing, but there was a minority (9 per cent)
which thought that they got too little. As between university groups there was
most satisfaction with the amount of lecturing at Oxford and Cambridge, where
nearly four out of five were satisfied, and least in the larger civic universities
and in the colleges of the University of Wales, where only just over three out of
five were satisfied.

167. One important justification advanced for the central position given to the
lecture is the immaturity of students, who are thought to learn more readily
by listening than by reading. The lecture is said to be specially valuable for

* As a general guide, respondents were asked to regard a student’s course as specialised
if the scope of his studies, apart from any subsidiary subjects, did not extend beyond the
scope of one academic department.

t ‘Lectures were once useful; but now, when all can read, and books are so numerous,
lectures are unnecessary. If your attention fails, and you miss part of a lecture, it is lost; you
cannot go back as you can upon a book’. Boswell. Life of Johnson.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

introducing and opening up a subject, and students can thus be led into subjects
which would prove too daunting for them if they were dependent on unassisted
reading. The lecturer knows, or should know, when he has lost contact with
his audience, and where the audience is not too large he can give opportunities
for questions which will show if he has failed to make himself clear. He can
then go back and try another explanation in different words, whereas the
student who has to go back in his book will only be able to read again the
words over which he has stumbled.

168. In science especially lectures are considered to be the best way to present
material which would be too complex to understand without oral explanation
or too wasteful of time to acquire otherwise. In this field a scheme of reading
would often be inordinately long and involved if it had to cover all the ground.
It is also said that while lectures can readily be co-ordinated with a scheme of
laboratory work, co-ordination would be much more difficult if lectures were
to be replaced by reading. In some fields, owing to the rapid advance of know-
ledge, satisfactory text books are said to be lacking. Moreover, in science, and
also in mathematics, lectures have the advantage over books that by the use
of visual aids complex diagrams and formulae can be built up gradually, and
structures with more than two dimensions can be better displayed.

169. Some lectures are said to be needed because there are too many books;
some because there are too few or none. The contradiction is more apparent
than real because lectures necessitated by a multiplicity of books tend to be of
a different kind from those necessitated by their paucity. Some of the evidence
we received distinguished between two kinds of lectures, and the same distinction
was implicit in other evidence. The two kinds may be described broadly as
elementary and advanced. In the first the lecture gives an outline of the subject,
and a framework for further study. Without guidance of this kind the young
student, it is said, may be bewildered by the multiplicity of books, some of
which are unsuitable for beginners. He may light upon one and absorb it
uncritically without detecting its possible bias or appreciating that there are
other points of view.

170. Lectures necessary to present material which is either not available in
print, or only available from scattered sources, are usually of the second type,
the advanced lecture on a special subject which takes the student up to the
frontiers of knowledge and introduces him to the results of research — in some
cases the lecturer’s own research — which have yet to be published, at any rate
in a form suitable for undergraduates.

171. To those who place a high value on the lecture as a method of teaching,
the lecture is not to be regarded merely as a means for making good the short-
comings of the literature of a subject. It is also valued as a demonstration of
technique and as a means of awakening a critical attitude on the part of the
student. Some of our evidence referred to the aesthetic pleasure to be derived
from a good lecture, and to the importance of the lecturer’s personality as a
means for communicating to the student a scholar’s enthusiasm for his subject.

172. Much of what has been said so far invites the rejoinder that it is a justifi-
cation for oral teaching as a supplement to reading, rather than for lectures as
distinct from other forms of oral teaching. No one doubts that university
students are not sufficiently mature to dispense with oral teaching ; the question
is whether the lecture has advantages, and if so what, over other forms of oral
teaching. The answer to this question is that there is a place in oral teaching

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

for continuous exposition, tree from the interruptions ami digressions inseiwable
from a discussion period, A lecture should be better prepared, more profound,
and better thought out than what is said m discussion where the teacher is
often replying to a student’s question, so that what he says is necessmily
extempore A lecture can cover more ground than a tutorial or seminar, which
is most effective when confined to a limited topic. It is also argued that discussion
can only become effective when the student has acquired sullicicnt knowledge
on which to base his contribution.

173 Other advantages of the lecture are that the inspiring teacher can by
lecturing infect with his enthusiasm a wider circle of students than he could
ever reach in seminars or by tutorial teaching, and that the variety of minds
and points of view with which a student makes contact by attending lectures
should stimulate his thought and safeguard him against regarding any single
teacher as wholly authoritative. Without such a variety of teaching as a cor-
rective a student’s tutor could, by his vei7 merits, attain an undue ascendancy
over his pupil’s mind; while any student who had an uncongenial tutor would
be badly off indeed without access to other and more lively or sympathetic
teachers, and lectures are one way in which such access can be given.

174. Finally, there is the question of economy of stall time, which is bound
to become an increasingly important consideration with the lisiiig demand for
higher education. If for some purposes uninterrupted exposition by word of
mouth is a satisfactory method of teaching, it should be used for those purposes,
since it is obvious that in this way a teacher can reach a gioup fai huger than
any manageable discussion group.

Table 7.1. Sizes of Lecture Audiences

Size of audience

Proportions of lectures to
audiences of various sizes

Median

numbers

1-4

5-9

10-19

20-100

over

100

audience

Per cent

University Groups:

Oxford and Cambridge . .

London

Other English:

Larger Civic

Smaller Civic . .

Wales

Scotland

Faculty Groups:

Humanities

J.'i

Social Studies

Pure Science

Applied Science . .

All non-medical . .

Source: University Teachers’ Survey.

Note: The figures for university groups include lectures in medical subjects. Such lectures
tend to have larger audiences (median numbers, pie-clinical, 36, clinical, 42) than lectures on
other subjects, but as lectures on medical subjects represent only about one-tenth of all lectures,
the resulting inflation is probably inconsiderable.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

175. In the survey of university teachers, respondents were asked to how many
classes of varying sizes they had given lectures (and other forms of teaching)
in the fortnight covered by the survey. Table 7.1 gives for university groups, and
for the faculties with which we are concerned, the proportions of lecture
audiences of various sizes, and the median size of audience.

176. It is also possible to derive from the main student survey the proportions
of lectures to audiences of various sizes attended by students in the sample in
the week which it covered, and this enables us both to make a check on the
figures obtained from the survey of university teachers and also to give
audience-sizes for certain groups which are not available from the latter survey.
The proportions of lectures of various sizes attended by all students in the
survey correspond fairly closely with those derived from the survey of university
teachers, though the figures for some of the smaller groups show unexplained
variations. In general, the student survey would suggest a somewhat higher
proportion of lectures to small audiences. The figures from the two surveys will
be compared in the Statistical Appendix, and it may suffice to give here (Table
7.2) those for certain groups not available from the survey of university teachers.

Table 7.2. Sizes of Lecture Audiences

Size of audience

Proportions of lectures with audiences of
various sizes attended by non-medical students

5-9

10-19

20-100

over 100

Per cent

First-year students

Students of other non-final-years

Final-year specialists . .

Final-year non-specialists

Honour students

Pass students

Unallocated students . .

All students

Source: Main Student Survey.

177. The proportion of lectures given to very small audiences (nine and under)
is thus no less than 27 (30)* per cent. To some extent it appears that size of
institution is a factor, since at the smaller civic universities and the Colleges
of the University of Wales the proportions of very small audiences are 31 (33)
and 30 (45) per cent respectively. But the most striking differences in the propor-
tions of very small audiences are those between final-year students (where it is
as high as 45 per cent for specialists and 49 per cent for non-specialists) and
first-year students (where it is as low as 13 per cent) with other non-final-year
students in a middle position (27 per cent). The next most striking difference is
that between humanities (where the proportion of very small audiences is as

• In this paragraph, where a number is followed by another in brackets, the former is
derived from the university teachers’ survey and the latter from the main student survey.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

■ , « cent) and other faculty groups, where the proportions range

high as 38 pel ) 20(24) per cent for pure science,

m dSerle between honours students (33 per cent) and pass students (27 per

cent) is smaller.

17 R The difference between humanities and other faculties may be partly due
Tit diaThumanities include a large number ol subjeets, some of which
lirai re« small numbers of .students.^ Numerous nmdern foreign
attract reiaiw y universities, but few of

languages with „ of students. After French and German, Spanish is

them attract ,„g,age with its related studies, taught in

s?l"sr-"

17 ™veisities 1961-62. But because some lunguages iind their related
degrees obta " j ^ follow thill they are unimportant. The

studies Slavonic, East [Uiropcan, and African stiidie.s has

SiT“he Ta?bcen the subject of oniciai inquiry resiiltiiig in acl-hoc limmcc
Td morfreceiitly the development of Latin American studies lias been referred
to aiomn ittee. Even in fields of study whiclt atlrnct large mimber.s ol .^iidenls
to a comm noctures may be given to very small audiences. Thus m

history Tvhich was a main subject in the courses of about 1 400 students who
histoiy, wu 1961-62 (about 9 per cciil ol all honours degrees

awarded in that year), 41 per cent of tlic lccUircs given in the lortniglU covered
bv our survey were given to audiences ol nine or lewei. I hesc Icctuies may be
ieXted for by the large number of optional special subjects avaikib e to
students taking special honours in history, and were in many cases ot the
advanced specialised type to which wc referred in para. 170 above.

179 The Committee on Higlicr Education, commenting on tlic bigli proportioii
of lectures attended by small audiences, said * that tlicy saw little virtue in lonnal
lectures delivered to small audiences. *A Icctuic slunild be somcl ung ofan
occasion and except in large universities, where in a big lecture list there is
room for the highly specialised lecture wliicb only a few gcmiinc cnlhusiasts
will attend, time spent in preparing courses of lectures foi- small audiences would
be better spent in giving more classes and in rcgulur and systematic correclion
of students’ own work’.

180. We could not accept this view witiioul some qualification. Wc agicc that
there are probably a number of lectures wliicli could with advantage be
eliminated. We also agree that a large audience gives a lecture tlio quality ofiui
occasion; it has a stimulating effect on the lecturer wliicb is bcnclicml and lends
to communicate itself to the audience. It is never easy to play to an empty house.
But not every lecture can be an occasion, and wc could not agree that there is
any very close relation between the size ofu lecture tuidiencc and the justilieiition
for the lecture, particularly under a regime in whicli aUondance at lectures is
obligatory. A proportion, perhaps a higli proportion, ol the lectures wliicli
should be eliminated are elementary lectures in wliich tlio lecturer is simply
summarising the contents of one, or a small number of, readily accc.ssible
text-books. Lectures given to first-year .students arc mainly elementary, but we
have shown that few lectures to first-year students are given to very small
audiences and that 70 per cent of lectures to first-year students are given to
audiences of over 20, a group too large for an effective seminal.

* Cmnd. 2154, para. 569.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

181. The Committee on Higher Education recognise the need for some highly
specialised lectures, but only at large universities. It does not seem to us that
the size of the university enters into the matter. The highly specialised lecture
is a necessary concomitant of highly specialised courses, in which students may
require material which does not exist in print and can best be given by lecture.
It may also be a valuable means of communicating a scholar’s enthusiasm to
his students. The Committee on Higher Education also say* that an excessive
proportion of students is drawn into specialised courses, and that a higher
proportion should be receiving a broader education for their first degrees. It
is not for us to comment on this. If the change advocated had the effect of
reducing the number of specialised courses (and not only the number of students
taking them), it might have the effect of reducing the number of lectures given
to small audiences, but this would be the incidental result of a change advocated
on quite other grounds.

182. We should perhaps add that the case for highly specialised lectures
cannot be considered simply from the point of view of undergraduate needs.
The preparation and delivery of a course of lectures containing new matter or
original ideas or points of view, or presenting matter which is not new in an
original way, may be an exercise of value to a scholar in clearing his mind and
giving precision to his thought. It may be a useful half-way house to publication,
enabling an author to obtain comment and criticism before crystallising what
he has to say in print. And if in future a higher proportion of undergraduates
is to receive a broader education, a higher proportion of first graduates will
probably also tend to demand and receive specialised postgraduate courses of
instruction, some of which will need to be given by lecturers to audiences
which can hardly be anything but small. These matters fall somewhat outside
our province, but cannot be ignored when the justification for lectures to small
audiences is under consideration.

183. Before leaving the question of size of lecture audiences, one possible
cause of confusion should perhaps be mentioned. When we say that the median
size of a lecture audience is 19, we mean that the number of less-attended
lectures is equal to the number of those attracting larger audiences; we do not
mean that the number of students attending lectures with audiences below 19
is as great as that attending lectures with larger audiences. This of course is not
the case. The number of student-hours spent at lectures with audiences of under
10 in the week covered by our survey was under 7 per cent of the number of
student-hours spent at all lectures. Most (63 per cent) were spent at lectures
with audiences between 20 and 100, and 16 per cent (33 per cent at Oxford and
Cambridge and 28 per cent in Scotland) were spent at lectures with audiences
of over 100.

184. It will be convenient if at this point we deal with certain specific questions
about lectures which we put to universities. We asked whether steps were taken
to explain to the student how he can get the greatest benefit from lectures. Most
departments in most universities give students advice on this point, commonly
as part of wider advice on how to study at a university. From one or two places
doubts were expressed whether many students pay much attention to advice
on how to benefit from lectures.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

1S5. Wea.o..ed^et«s«

of a lecture or whether he should b P ’where he is left to make his own

with a ready-made summary; and f . wh^ he ‘S

notes, steps should be taken to see that he does so and mail
after;ardl All universities think that student shoum^^^^^^

In two cases it was ^“dthat^nch h°tes ”d „ote-taking as an

distract students’ attention, but °thm univers miking the student think,
exercise of educational value this latter view. Almost

and training him in selection. W insoection of lecture notes, though

aU universities are against any supervision or in p
there are a few places where it occurs.

186. The Idea that a student should write

regarded by some of our f ? t neatly, word for word,

however, that we meant ^^h mo^ t,^,.ough

S not: f to"?sel that he understands them, -d ^ -fer-es
lafthe k ind o“bri^^^^^^ barely legible jottings which remain intelhgib e, even

of lectures given to many students are too crowded to allow time for this process
187 The circulation of written material in connection with a lecture normal
but it is usually not of a kind which would relieve the student of the need to make
his own notes'! Circulated material is commonly co^nned to such matter as
formulae, definitions, numerical data, statistics.

araohic information, etc. In some places, however, summaues of the content
If the lecture are also circulated. Sometimes these are described as Actual ,
i e as excluding opinion, but at some universities summaries of whole lectures
are provided by some departments. Some witnesses described such summaries
as ‘a dreary form of spoon-feeding’. Not all summaries, however, are in our
view to be condemned. We see advantage in a relatively brief summary giving
the student the framework within which to add his own notes. I"
summaries may be made necessary by the number of lectures to which the
student has to go, but this is not a state of affairs which we can commend.
The object of providing summaries was stated by two universities to be to fiee
the student from note-taking so that he could give his whole attention to the
lecture. More realistic, we think, are the views that students will not attend to
a lecture of which they know that they will receive a full summary; and that
summaries, particularly of opinion, are open to^ the risk that they may be
memorised and the opinion accepted as authoritative.

188. As a means of communicating a summary to students, dictation of more
than a few words at a time, when it is mentioned at all, is condemned as a waste
of time; and to write a summary on the blackboard for transcription into
students’ note-books, though not specifically mentioned, would seem to be open
to the same criticism. We should not, however, be understood to condemn the
use of the blackboard. There are purposes for which it is particularly suitable,
for example when a figure, diagram, or formula is to be built up gradually as

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

the argument proceeds. Some lecturers, we fear, are obliged by the lack of
facilities for copying to use dictation or the blackboard when it would be
preferable to circulate duplicated material. We included certain questions in
our questionnaire to university teachers to find out the extent to which lecturers
resort to dictation or the blackboard to enable students to take down verbatim,
and the extent which they circulate written material to students attending their
lectures. A note on these questions and the answers to them will form part
of the Statistical Appendix.

189. We asked universities whether policy in the matter of lectures has been
influenced by difficulties of ensuring that all students in a course have access
to necessary books or periodicals and/or facilities for reading. Few universities
can give to this question a negative reply which is quite unqualified, and though
not many seem to be seriously affected, there are some traces of anxiety. Lack
of books or periodicals may affect policy in various ways; it may make it
necessary to cover in lectures matter which, but for a shortage of books or
periodicals, would be left to reading, or it may even affect the content of a
course. It is not always simply a matter of insufficient copies of a publication.
There are said to be some courses, particularly in science, for which there are
no text books, or no suitable text books. At a time of rapid scientific development,
there are some fields in which the most recent material may not yet have been
presented in a way which is suitable for undergraduate students. The only
available sources may give it in a form in which it is liable to confuse them.
Some introduction should be given to the processes by which new facts are
established and the formulation of new theories is refined, but too much of the
latest material may be detrimental to the student’s grasp of basic principles.

190. In view of the criticism of compulsory attendance at lectures we asked
universities what academic requirements, apart from the passing of any prescribed
examinations, a student has to satisfy in order that he may be permitted to
continue his studies and be admitted to his final examination; whether, for
example, he is required to attend certain lectures or other forms of teaching
in order to be admitted, and whether this requirement is enforced.

191. The position is clearest at Oxford and Cambridge and in the Scottish
Universities. In Scotland a student cannot sit a degree examination without a
‘class certificate’ from the Head of the Department concerned with each subject
in which he is to be examined, to the effect that he has ‘regularly attended and
duly performed’ the work of the class, and such a certificate may be refused if
attendance is below 75 per cent. But what one University describes as ‘the
indignity and often farce’ of checking attendance at lectures seems to be
increasingly omitted, more importance being attached to attendance at tutorials
and practicals and to the quality of written work.

192. At Oxford and Cambridge, on the other hand, there are no university
requirements of attendance at lectures. The matter is one for the colleges, where
the arrangements for supervision make it possible to consider a student’s work
and conduct as a whole in deciding whether he can be allowed to continue to
reside. At most other universities in England and Wales the formal position
is rather like that in Scotland, but a formal certificate is not everywhere required
and it is usually left to the Head of the Department to decide how far to insist
on attendance. Some universities have given up keeping attendance registers,
which are not always to be relied on.

(50678) E

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

193 The question whether lectures should be compulsory or voluntary is not
L easy one to answer if posed as a sharp dilemma with no middle course. The
unreliability of attendance registers makes strict enfoi cement difficult but
bLuse the difficulties of enforcing a rigid rule requiring a specified attendance
at lectures may make such a rule inadvisable, it does not follow that university
authorities can be indifferent to the attendance of students at lectuies. Wheie
Z student’s course is based on a series of tutorials to winch lectures are ancillary
voluntary lecture-going may be possible; thougli even here we believe that
tutors probably know whether their pupils attend the lectuies iccommuidcd to
them Md would regard a student’s attendance or non-attendance as relevant
to th; assessment of his academic progress. Where, however, the course is based
on a framework of lectures, and particularly where, as in some science courses,
the student may have no practicable way of acquiring necessary knowledge
except by attending lectures, attendance at lectures becomes more important,
and it is clearly reasonable that authority should require to know whether a
student is attending them, and bring some pressure to bear on the student who
fails to attend. Non-attendance at lectures may be the first sign of tiouble.

194. Most students are receiving grants from public funds, and have been
selected to receive teaching which is in short supply, to the exclusion of othei
would-be students. In these circumstances neither university authorities nor
grant-making authorities can be indifferent to whether a student is availing
himself of the teaching provided ; otherwise he might absent himself altogether.
Evidence of attendance at teaching periods, of whatever kind, can be important
evidence as to whether the student is making satisfactory progress.

195. Looked at in this light, the real question seems to be what lectures, if
any should be made an exception to the general rule that some attendance at
the teaching provided should be required as a condition of taking the examination
with which the course ends. At most universities more importance is attached to
attendance at seminars, tutorials, practical classes, and field work, than
to attendance at lectures. The question whether students should be required to
attend a particular series of lectures must depend on the importance attached
to those lectures as part of the teaching for the course on which they are engaged,
and this must he a matter for those responsible for the teaching for that course.
What seems to us to be important is that there should be no ambiguity on the
point. If a series of lectures is one at which their attendance is considered
necessary, students should be so informed. The fact that large iitimbeis at a
necessary lecture make the keeping of a reliable attendance registei impiacticable
would not, in our view, be a good reason for not telling students that they are
expected to attend it.

(ii) DISCUSSION PERIODS

196. In a lecture the student spends the period, apart from any time allowed for
questions, in listening to, and taking notes of, a continuous exposition. There
may be a few questions, but there is no discussion. It is of the essence of a
discussion period that the student is expected to participate in discussion, and
there is this justification for treating the discussion period as a single category.
There are, however, differences in the way in which such periods are used by
those who conduct them, depending to some extent, but not entirely, on the
number of students present. Many university teachers recognise a qualitative

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

difference between a tutorial and a seminar which is not simply a difference of
numbers, but that difference is not sufficiently clear-cut to be made the basis
of a sepaiate category, and we have therefore had to base our distinction between
tutorials and seminars on the numbers present, with four as the largest group
which we treat as a tutorial.*

197. ^ Perhaps the main qualitative difference betw'een the tutorial and the
seminar is that the former is, or should be, student-centred, while the latter is
subject-centred. In the tutorial the teacher is concerned with the development
of the powers of a particular student or students, and uses the subject to what
he considers the best advantage to promote that development. In the seminar
the numbers are greater, and the teacher is therefore necessarily more concerned
to secure an adequate exposition and discussion of the topic on which the
seminar is held. These are not absolute differences, but differences of emphasis.
The tutorial does teach the subject as well as develop the student’s powers ; and
to participate in a seminar does develop the student’s powers as well as teach
him tlie subject. It is because the main difference between tutorial and seminar
is a difference of emphasis that no sharp line of demarcation can be drawn
between them. Moreover, as teaching by discussion is given to groups of all
sizes, from one upwards, the change in the character of the teaching is gradual
as the numbers increase.

198. Nor is there any sharp difference of procedure on which a distinction
could be based. A seminar normally begins with the reading of a paper or essay
written by a member of the seminar group, and this is followed by discussion. A
tutorial commonly begins in a similar way, though there may be no written
work by the student, discussion being initiated by the teacher. Where the
tutorial is given to one student, he presents the work which he has prepared,
or has it handed back to him, the teacher having already read it, and discussion
follows. Where the tutorial is given to more than one student, every student
may prepare written work, but the teacher may select only some of this work
to be considered in detail. As the tutorial group increases in numbers, students
may not prepare written work for every tutorial, but only, say, for every other
one. At this stage the procedure of the tutorial as well as the character of the
teaching becomes assimilated to that of the seminar. All discussion periods should
end with some discussion of the work to be done for the next period, in which
students are given guidance on the reading necessary to prepare for it. Here
again procedures of the tutorial and the seminar should be similar.

199. There are other respects, as well as size and the use of the student’s
written work, in which there is diversity in the use of discussion periods. They
may be held with varying frequency; they may or may not be related to a
concurrent course of lectures ; they may be always conducted by the same teacher,

* In the survey of university teachers a ‘tutorial’ was defined as a discussion period which
(a) is attended by not more than four students and (b) is one of a series of such periods con-
ducted by the same teacher; and a ‘seminar’ was defined as a discussion period which is not
a tutorial. In material derived from this survey, these terms should be so understood. In the
main student survey, however, questions were not asked about tutorials and seminars as such,
but about discussion periods. ‘Tutorial’ and ‘seminar’ were not therefore defined in this
questionnaire. Students were however asked to give the numbers present at discussion periods.
In using material derived from this survey discussion periods attended by not more than four
.students have been treated as tutorials, without regard to criterion (h) above, and those
attended by more than four students as seminars.

( 90678 )

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

or bv changing teachers; more than one teacher may be present;* and the
topS Ssed may or may not be selected to give a planned sequence of

discussions.

200 In view of the somewhat uncritical acceptance by students of the meri s
of the lL7ion period as a method of teaching, we asked universities to tell us
in fte S are its hmitations, and in particular what is the size ot group
Tbov; or be ow which the effectiveness of this method of teaching declines. The
wLonrof in discussion periods, as seen by a number of universities

mav be summarized as foUows. It is extravagant of staff time to do in small
~ aSg that could equally well be done by a lecture to a larger audience^
Kver the discussion group, being in its nature subject to interruptions and
digressions is not suitable for logical exposition. It moves too slowly to cover
aSg bAt a Umited topic. It is also liable to suffer from incoherence and may
be dLfged by any lack of balance in the opening paper. It makes great demands
on th“teacher who conducts it. He must avoid over-influencing the discussion,
which requires skilful handling if it is to evoke the inte ligent
its value depends. The student may fail to benefit unless he knows something
about the topic under discussion. It therefore requires and to get,

adequate preparation from the student. There is also the difficulty of getting
shy and inarticulate students to play their part, and of preventing the discussion
from being monopolised by the more loquacious.

201. Many universities distinguish between the optimum size of group for
tutorials and seminars respectively. For the fornier some prefer individual
teaching and it would be widely held that three or four is the largest group for
Ihich tutorials are effective. No definition of tutorial by reference to numbers
present was included in the question, and it is therefore interesting that some
universities took, as the largest group for an effective tutorial, the same number
as that which we adoptedf as the limit of size beyond which a discussion period
ceases to be a tutorial. For seminars many would regard six as the smallest
group likely to produce an effective discussion. Few universities favour a
seminar group greater than 12 and several put the maximum as low as 10.
One university made the point that the tutorial or discussion group begins to
decline in efficiency at the point where any student m it is able, or forced, to be
a mere passenger. In view of these opinions, it was somewhat disconcerting to
find that of all student time reported in the student survey as spent in sernmars
as we have defined them (discussion periods with five or more present), 53 per
cent was spent in groups of 10 or more, including 22 per cent in gioups of 20
or more. Seminars run larger in science than in arts, and larger in applied
science than in pure science. In applied science 56 per cent of all student time
spent in seminars was in groups of 20 or more. It is difficult to see how sufficient
student participation can be obtained in so large a group.

202. The only objective study in this country of which we are aware of the
effect of size of tutorial group on the efficiency of tutorial teaching is one which
was made in 1960-61 and 1961-62 by Professor T. L. Cottrell in the Department

* Of all student hours spent in discussion periods reported in the main student survey, the
proportions spent in such periods at which two or more teachers were present yariecl from
imder 3 per cent in arts to 9 per cent in pure science and 25 per cent m applied science. Most
of the hours spent in discussion periods in science at which two or more teachers were present
were spent at periods at which 20 or more students were present. .

t See footnote to para. 196. Our questions to universities were sent to them before the issue
of the questionnaire to university teachers in which ‘tutorial’ was denned.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

of Chemistry in the University of Edinburgh. His conclusion was that in the
context of his experiments variation in size of tutorial group front three students
to 24 students had no significant effect on their examination performance,
groups of 12 actually doing slightly (but not significantly) better than groups
of three. Professor Cottrell remarks that ‘if the main virtues of the tutorial
system are that it encourages regular habits of work, and regular writing about
the objects of study, with the actual tutorial discussion playing a relatively
minor part, then it is not surprising that the size of the tutorial group is
unimportant’. This suggests that the type of teaching given in these tutorials
may have been somewhat different from the student-centred teaching commonly
given to groups of four or fewer. But the experiment is clearly of considerable
interest, and we print Professor Cottrell’s memorandum as Appendix IX, in
the hope that it may encourage further investigation.

203 . There are important differences between one university group and another
in the relative extent to which tutorials and seminars, as we have defined them,
are used. These differences may be seen from Table 7.3.

Table 7.3. Students’ discussion-period hours by size of group

Group Size

Oxford

and

Cambridge

London

Other English

Wales

Scotland

All

Larger

civic

Smaller

civic

Per cent

of hours

Tutorials:

Four or less

Seminars :

Five to nine

Ten to 19

20 and over

All discussion periods

100

Source: Main Student Survey.

204. From this table it would appear that the main difference is between
Oxford and Cambridge on the one hand and most other universities on the
other. Although in 1961-62 only 16 per cent of the undergraduate population
were at Oxford and Cambridge, 39 per cent of all tutorials given to not more
than four students by members of the teachers’ sample were given at Oxford
and Cambridge. In the main student survey 51 per cent’* of all the hours spent
by the sample in tutorials were spent by Oxford and Cambridge students. Of all
hours under instruction at Oxford and Cambridge, 14-5 per cent were spent in
tutorials, the corresponding figure for other universities being 3-3 per cent.
The greatest difference is in science. Science students at Oxford and Cambridge

* This percentage is not inconsistent with the 39 per cent in the previous sentence. It is
higher than the first figure becau.se the first figure relates to the number of tutorials and the
second to the number of hours spent by students attending tutorials; and tutorial groups at
Oxford and Cambridge are smaller than elsewhere.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

, ^ , • tntnrial a? arts students, whereas elsewhere the

get science. Consequently, whereas in arts students

"ord and Cambridge spend twice as long in tutorials as students elsewhere,
in science they spend six or seven times as long.

90^ It may be objected that by drawing the line between tutorials
205. ItiB y j , <>vQCTcrp^rfitf*fl the difference between Oxfoid and
at four students we ^ ^liich tutorial teaching is used,

Cambridge and other ^ive^ „„j^ersities to groups

since ° tf discussion periods with fewer than 10 students are taken as

iTciTeaorv there is relatively little difference between Oxford and Cambridge

and CamWdge being about three or four times as long as elsewhere.

onfi There are also important differences between universities in the place
which d^cusston periods occupy in the scheme of teaching, as well as in he
«ter of the iLtruction which is given in them. At most umvcrsities tiie
lectures form the core of the instruction given, with seminars and/or tutorials
betng used for ancillary purposes. These purposes, which are not mutually
Ssi^ may be to cover certain parts of the course, sudr as specialist options,
arin aMive to lectures; or as a means of reinforcing lecture courses, as
when a small seminar is geared to each lecture in a course ; or simply as a means
of ensuring that students do some work for themselves, on topics which may
not be therabject of lectures. Where lectures give the framework of the coupe,
the emphasis placed on teaching by discussion, and the proportion of staff time
which it occupies, can vary widely, commonly reaching a maximum m a flnal-
Tear specS subjed or optiL. On the other hand, at a small minority of universi-
ties ^d even then not in every discipline, the core or framework of the course
is provided by a tutor or director of studies who gives or arranges for his students
a planned series of tutorial periods, with lectures in an ancillary capacity.

207 At this point we think that some account should be given of the traditional
system at Oxford. A comparative study of teaching methods would be incomplete
wSt Tnot because it is necessarily the best, but because it lies, so to speak
at one end of the spectrum. Not only does a series of tutouals provide the
framework of the course, with lectures in an ancillary capaohy, but the teaching
given is probably more student-centred than elsewhere. At Oxford each colleg
arranges for its students the tutorial work m which teachmg is centred. T
traditfonal arrangement is that the college assigns each student to a teaching
fellow as his tutor, whose function it is both to organize liis work and to give
him at least part of the teaching he receives. In general a tutor covers in his
teachmg a wider range than his own research field, but some courses make it
necessary for the student to have more than one tutor at the same and
some subjects tutors find it necessary to delegate to specialists the teaching
some parts of their subject in which they have not themselves specialised. A
student may also come under a different tutor or tutors as he passes from one
stage of his course to another. It is, however, probably true to say that almost
all students at Oxford have had at least one tutor to whom they have gone for
at least three terms, and most will have had more continuity.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

208. Combining in the same teacher the duties of taking overall responsibility
for the student and of teaching him has certain important consequences.

(a) If a man teaches a wider range of subject than his own speciality in
research, it affects the kind of teaching which he gives. Though some
tutors regard this as a disadvantage, many regard the achievement of
wide knowledge and appreciation as one of the marks of academic
excellence. The tutor is not expected to have a specialist’s familiarity
with all the facts over the whole range of the student’s course, but he
must know where the facts are to be found and how to handle them.
The tutor’s difficulty in having a sufficient command over the whole
range of subject for which he is a tutor must increase with the increase
in the volume of knowledge, and the practice of sending students for
some of their tutorial teaching to specialists seems bound to grow. But
as long as the primary responsibility for teaching as well as for direction
of studies is undivided, the tendency of Oxford tutors to teach a wider
range than is usual elsewhere may be expected to continue.

(b) As at other universities, the pupil will normally submit for the weekly
tutorial an essay on a fairly wide topic set by his tutor. This will either
be read by the tutor before the tutorial or read to the tutor by the
student at the tutorial. In either case it will then be commented on and
criticised by the tutor, with discussion following. There is nothing
peculiar to Oxford in this, but the tutor’s approach to the essay is
rather different from what it would be if he were teaching his own
speciality. He will be concerned to ensure that his pupil gives critical
attention to his facts, recognises false arguments, and attains an under-
standing of the way of thinking which has developed as most appropriate
and useful for his subject. He may concentrate rather more on the
validity of the student’s arguments and on the independence of his
thought than on the content and subject matter. There is no suggestion
that at Oxford attention is given only to these things, or that they are
neglected elsewhere, but the balance of emphasis there tends to be
different from that which is found where men tend more to teach only
within the range of their speciality.

(c) Since the tutor sets the main work to be done by his pupil and arranges
the order of the topics he tackles, he can and does vary the course to
suit the pupil, and does not advise the same lectures to every pupil of
the same year. Thus every student’s course can be adapted to his
interests, pace, and capacity, and in these circumstances lectures and
tutorials cannot be geared together. Nor do some tutors think that they
should be, the view being taken that if lectures and tutorials covered
the same ground at the same time the student might get the impression
that he had finished with that part of the subject.

(rf) These arrangements necessitate the adoption of the ‘Board of Examiners’
method of examining as against the method in which the whole staff
of an academic department take part in the examination, each member
examining in the speciality he has taught. The relative advantages and
disadvantages of these systems are discussed in paras. 274 seq. of
Chapter IX.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

209. For this style of teaching the one-to-one tutorial is generally preferred
at Oxford, and though some tutors take their students m pairs, this is probably
more often done on account of pressure of numbers than from choice. Few
Oxford tutorials are given to more than two students.

210 There are certain respects in which Cambridge is similar to Oxford,
others in which it differs. At Cambridge the functions of the Oxford tutor are
divided between a director of studies and supervisors. The former helps the
student to choose the options available in his course, plans his work, advises
him on lectures, and arranges his supervisions. Supervisions may be given not
only by college fellows (including the student’s director of studies) but also,
probably to a greater extent than at Oxford, by research students and other
persons who are not college fellows.

211. This system tends to result, at any rate in science and some other fields,
in the tutorial teaching of any given student being divided between a number of
specialists, and this must affect the character of the teaching he receives. With
the growth of specialisation Cambridge students have asked for and been given
more and more supervision, and this has caused a tendency for supervision to
be given in larger groups than Cambridge opinion appears to consider desiiable.

212. These factors come out clearly in certain figures which we obtained for
Oxford and Cambridge separately. The number of tutorials given by members
of the Oxford and Cambridge samples of university teachers were about the
same, but as Cambridge supervision was given to larger groups the number of
students taught in them was greater at Cambridge. Table 7.4 shows the position.

Table 7.4. Tutorials given at Oxford and Cambridge by size of group

Oxford

Cambridge

Per cent

Tutorials given to ;

One Student

Two Students

Three Students

Four Students . .

Number of tutorials given in the fortnight

1,648

1,639

Approximate number of student attendances at

2,450

3,300

these tutorials

Source: University Teachers’ Survey.

213. It may be deduced’* from the above table that at Oxford about 86 per cent
of student attendances at tutorials were at tutorials given to students singly and
in pairs. At Cambridge the corresponding proportion was 59 per cent. The
number of student attendances at tutorials reported by members of the University
teachers’ samples at Oxford and Cambridge must have been about 2,450 and
3,300 respectively, but these figures may understate the difference between the

*The number of students taught in 100 Oxford tutorials was 61 X 1 -1-33x2-1-4x3 -1-2x4,
i.e., 147. Of these 127 (61 X I -f 33 X 2) were taught singly or in pairs, and this figure is 86 per
cent of 147. Similarly, the number of students taught in 101 Cambridge supervisions was
32x1-1-44 x 2-1-17 x 3 + 8 x 4, i.e., 203. Of these 120 (32x1+44x2) were taught singly or in
pairs, and this figure is 59 per cent of 203.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

two univorsities in the amount of tutorial teaching, since at Cambridge in
1959-60 36 per cent of all hours of supervision were given by persons, such as
research students, who, being neither college fellows nor university teaching
officers, would not be represented in the sample of university teachers. There
is believed to be less of this kind of delegation at Oxford.

214. The main features of the system described are (a) the concentration in
one tutor or director of studies of responsibility both for organising the work of
the^ students of his college at a particular stage of a particular course, and for
giving them some teaching, and (6) the high proportion of teaching which is
given in one-to-one tutorials. This system originated at a time when there was
little or no laboratory teaching, and when degree courses demanded less
specialised knowledge than they do today. This is not to say that it has lost its
value. It would not have been adopted for science and retained for all subjects
if the prevailing opinion had ceased to believe in it, but modern conditions have
subjected the system to some strains, and it is not without its critics.

215. The two features mentioned in the last paragraph are not necessarily
concomitant, and the advantages and disadvantages of each can be separately
considered. In favour of a single tutor or director of studies who remains
responsible, if not for the student’s whole course, at least for a considerable
part of it, is the argument that it is only in this way that he can get to know the
student, assess his ability, and understand his strong and weak points well
enough to be effective in guiding, encouraging, and criticising his work in the
general context of his whole development. Moreover, the student should be
guarded against the risk that he will fail to grasp the range of subject covered
by his course as a coherent whole. Thirdly, some students find it easier to
unburden themselves on personal matters to someone whom they know really
well.

216. There are however advantages to the student in receiving small-group
teaching from several people, each covering a special field of interest. A man
who is teaching only his own speciality will find it easier to teach and will be
able to provide his students with fuller and more up-to-date knowledge. The
best students will find a specialist more stimulating. Moreover, with a single
tutor there is always a risk that a student will find himself tied to someone who
is uncongenial or who may overstress a special interest of his which is not that
which the student wishes to pursue. ‘He would talk about arthropods when I
wanted to discuss jawbones’. And even if the tutor is sympathetic and the
student shares his interest, there may be the more risk that the student will
mirror his tutor’s mind too closely. A variety of teaching might be more
stimulating and help the student better to acquire an independent point of view.
Perhaps the best results may be obtained when a tutor with a synoptic res-
ponsibility delegates part of his teaching duties to colleagues with different
special interests from his own.

217. The one-to-one tutorial was criticised by the Committee on Higher
Education* on three grounds: (a) that it is ‘too exacting’ for most students,
who would gain more from being members of a class of three or four; (b) that
it is costly; and (c) that it is ‘extremely wasteful of the teacher’s time if it involves
a great deal of repetition of material which all students of a subject have to
learn to handle’. These criticisms call for some comment. We take them in
reverse order.

* Cmnd. 2154, para. 567.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

218 As regards the third criticism, it is not the proper function of the one-to-
one tutorial to provide factual information to the student, who should get it
from books, lectures, periodicals, classes, or observation in the field. For
subiect-centred teaching a larger group may be more satisfactory as well as
being more economical. But the one-to-one tutorial is a student-centred
operation in which the teacher is primarily concerned with the development
of the student’s powers of thought. In it he must discuss the material with the
student and ensure that his pupil has mastered it, but the material used the
way in which it is handled, and the use which is made of it, all vary from student
to student The case for the one-to-one tutorial rests on the hypothesis that
each student differs from his feUows to an extent which requires individual
treatment in some of the teaching he receives if his powers are to be developed
to the full extent of which he is capable.

219 Turning to the question of cost, it is clear that one-to-one tutorials, taken
in isolation from the system of which they form part, are expensive. But in
considering cost the system of which one-to-one tutorials form part should be
considered as a whole. There are other features of the system which are
economical, particularly the shorter hours given to lectures and other forms of
formal teaching, and the greater extent to which the student is expected to work
on his own. These economical features are rendered possible by the intensive
character of the weekly tutorial.

220. We were unable to obtain the material to compare the cost of teaching
undergraduates at Oxford with that at other universities. The University Grants
Committee provided us with figures showing university expenditure per student
at Oxford and elsewhere. But such figures are inconclusive, partly because they
do not include the expenditure incurred on teaching by the Oxford colleges,
for which no figures are available, and partly because they include the cost of
research and of teaching graduate students, which varies from one university to
another, and cannot be isolated without making a number of arbitrary
assumptions.

221. Without figures of actual expenditure the only way of obtaining an
indication of the relative costs of the Oxford sytem and of that prevailing at
most other universities is by a comparison of staff-student ratios. A comparison
on this basis has the advantage over one based on expenditure that it is possible
to take college teaching into account, since the Committee on Higher Education
were able to obtain for Oxford numbers of full-time academic staff which
included aU college teachers and research fellows, including those not holding
university posts.* We are aware that staff-student ratios are an uncertain basis
for comparing the cost of undergraduate teaching at different universities, since
the comparison may be vitiated by differences in such factors as numbers of
students, the balance of studies, and the emphasis on research and postgraduate
teaching. Nevertheless, if a system of undergraduate teaching based on very
small tutorials were very expensive, the high cost could hardly fail to be reflected
in the staff-student ratio. In fact the ratio of staff to undergraduate students in
1961-62 in the faculties with which we are concerned was less favourable at
Oxford (1:7-6) than at universities other than Oxford and Cambridge (1 ; 6 • 4).f

* Report of Committee on Higher Education, Appendix Three, Cmnd. 2154 III, Annex A,

These figures differ from those given in Table 4 on page 7 of Cmnd. 2154 III (1 : 7.3 and
1 ; 6.2) because the latter include medicals.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

We can only conclude that if the one-to-one tutorial is used, as it can be, to
reduce the time given to other forms of teaching and to make the student do more
for himself, the result on balance need not be expensive. We believe that a few
universities, which give an emphasis to teaching by small tutorials similar to
that given at Oxford, have found it possible to do so without costs getting out
of line with the national average. It is, however, fair to add that in some discip-
lines the Oxford system makes a rather heavy demand on college fellows for
tutorial teaching, though the Oxford term is shorter than at most other
universities. In the fortnight covered by the teachers’ survey 14 per cent of all
university teachers gave 13 or more tutorials. The corresponding percentage at
Oxford alone was 58, and there no fewer than 27 per cent gave 25 or more.*

222. Among the factors which can affect the demands made by tutorial
teaching on academic staff is the use of graduate students to give tutorials.
We have no information as to the extent to which graduate students are so
used at Oxford, but at Cambridge, where 36 per cent of all the hours of super-
vision given in 1 959/60 were given by persons who were neither college fellows nor
university ofRcers, about half of these persons were research students and other
graduatesf. We asked universities whether they had had to take any special
measures to avert or minimise the adverse effects on teaching of difBculties in
filling teaching posts, and from the replies to these questions we derived the
impression that, while graduate students are commonly used as demonstrators,
their use for tutorial teaching is much less common and regarded as an expedient
of only limited usefulness. The Bridges Syndicate at Cambridge, however,
formed the view that some but not all research students made good supervisors,
and that there was no close correlation between the seniority of a supervisor
and the special qualities which the work demands.^

223. We come now to the question whether a one-to-one tutorial is ‘too
exacting’. To describe any form of tutorial as ‘too exacting’ seems to us to
misconceive the purpose of a tutorial, wliich is precisely to be as exacting as
possible, i.e., to evoke from the student the greatest intellectual effort of which
he is capable and to stretch his ability to the utmost. Students of course have
different degrees of ability and their minds move at different speeds, but the
experienced teacher will be able to suit his teaching to the student and avoid
trying to make a student of limited ability go faster than he can. Some tutors

* Table 61 in Grand. 2154 III gives the average weekly hours worked in term by respondents
to the university teachers’ survey. The hours given for Oxford and Cambridge (42) were little
longer than the national average (41). It may be said therefore that the demand made by tutorial
teaching at Oxford and Cambridge does not result in exceptionally long hours. There is,
however, some reason to think that the table understates the average weekly hours worked by
teachers at Oxford and Cambridge. These hours are based on the replies to a series of questions
asking respondents to state the time given to a number of activities, including ‘discussion
periods’. Discussion periods were defined in an appendix to the questionnaire as including
tutorials, and the time recorded for discussion periods should therefore have included time
spent in giving tutorials. A later question asked respondents whether they gave any tutorials
in the fortnight covered by the survey, and if so, how many. A further analysis of the results of
the survey, undertaken since the report of the committee was published, has shown that some
teachers, mostly at Oxford and Cambridge, erroneously omitted to record time spent in giving
tutorials as time spent in discussion periods with undergraduates, with the result that the time
which they spent in giving tutorials was not included in their average weekly hours of work.
An estimate of the extent to which these errors affect the average hours reported by university
teachers is given in Appendix Two (B) Part IV to the report of the Committee on Higher
Education. It appears that, Oxford and Cambridge apart, the differences are not si^iflcant.

f Report of the Syndicate on the Relationship between the University and the Colleges,
Appendix J, Table 4, The Cambridge University Reporter, 13.3.62.

t Ibid, para. 61 .

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

say that they have had more expressions of thanks and appreciation from
students of limited ability than from abler men. It is the merit of the one-to-one
tutorial that the teaching can be suited to the pupil’s ability and that he can be
taken at his own pace. But that pace should be his best pace.

224. It is also suggested that most students would gain more from being
members of a class of three or four. This is a quite different point and a more
debatable one. The pupil brings to a one-to-one tutorial an essay or other
written exercise which has been set the week before, and the purpose of the
tutorial is to go through this work with the pupil, comment on his handling
of the material, and discuss with him the issues that arise from it. This is
essentially a one-to-one operation, and something must be lost if a second pupil
is present. The student whose work is not being commented on, or who has
not found the difficulty which is being resolved, is not fully engaged. Each
student will have his own pace, and an abler student will not be fully exerting
himself. Nor can the tutor be quite as candid about a student’s shortcomings
with others present as he could if they were alone. In various ways it is more
difficult to attain at a multi-pupil tutorial the objectives at which a one-to-one
tutorial aims, and we believe that if, as stated by the Committee on Higher
Education, the single-pupil tutorial is going out at the older English universities,
it is doing so at Oxford for reasons other than a preference for a larger group.

225. Outside Oxford, however, there is a considerable body of opinion in
favour of taking two or more students together in a tutorial. Those who hold
this view say that the immaturity and shyness of most students prevents them
from getting the benefit they should from a one-to-one tutorial. We think that
most university teachers agree that some students are very difficult to draw out,
and that great perseverance is required to make contact with them, though
some find the ultimate results rewarding. Even if the student is not particularly
shy, it is arguable that the inequality of intellectual power and attainment
between tutor and pupil is often too great for any real discussion. For such
reasons some think that a tutorial with two or three students produces better
results as they give one another encouragement and discussion between them is
livelier through being conducted on equal terms. A well-matched pair stimulate
each other and produce a type of competition which is very desirable. Others
however have found shy students more inhibited by the presence of other
students than when alone with an older person.

226. If students are to derive full benefit from a discussion period, whether
seminar or tutorial, it is essential that they should do some work beforehand
on the subject to be discussed. Perhaps the most effective way of getting students
to do preparatory work is to set them an essay or other written exercise to be
prepared for discussion. In the main student survey, students were asked about
the frequency with which they prepared in their own time written work of any
kind for criticism, not necessarily at a tutorial, by a member of the staff. Of the
whole sample 61 per cent said that they produced written work for criticism
at least once a week, and a further 18 per cent said that they did so once a
fortnight. Ten per cent did so once or twice a term, and 1 1 per cent did so less
frequently or not at all. There were variations between faculties in the proportions
producing written work fortnightly or more often, with 84 per cent doing so
in arts, 76 per cent in pure science, and 72 per cent in applied science. Honours
students (83 per cent) did so more often than pass students (69 per cent). But
the greatest variations were between certain university groups. At Oxford and

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Cambridge 95 per cent produced written work for criticism at least fortnightly,
and 91 per cent at least weekly. In Scotland, however, these proportions fell
to 66 per cent and 50 per cent, and there were 17 per cent who produced written
work for criticism less often than once a term or not at all. In all other university
groups written work was produced for criticism at least fortnightly by between
78 and 80 per cent of students.

227. Nearly all written work prepared by students for staff criticism is dealt
with in one of three ways :

(fl) It is handed in to the teacher who set it, and he returns it with written
comment, but does not discuss it with the student.

(h) It is handed in to the teacher who set it, and he returns it, usually with
some written comment, and then discusses it at a discussion period.

(c) It is not handed in to the teacher who set it. The student reads it to
him at a discussion period, and receives his comments orally as part
of the discussion.

Method (c) is common practice at Oxford and Cambridge, but it is not possible
where the written work includes formulae or mathematical working which is
unsuitable for reading aloud, and it may be found less convenient where a
number of students share a discussion period. In such cases the method adopted
is usually (b).

228. In the teachers’ survey, those who normally set written work were asked
how they dealt with it, but the replies are not easy to interpret as a certain
number of respondents answered afhrmatively to more than one question in a
group of questions intended to be mutually exclusive. It is clear, however, that
three-quarters of respondents have the written work they set handed in to them
to read, 50 per cent at Oxford and Cambridge, and 80 per cent, more or less,
at other universities. Only 9 per cent appear to adopt method (a), the proportions
in university groups ranging from one per cent at Oxford and Cambridge to
16 per cent in Scotland, with other universities differing little from the average.

229. Students were also asked how their written work was dealt with. Of the
whole sample (and not only of those who do written work) 14 per cent said that
they prepared written work which was returned to them with written comment,
but not discussed. The difference between tliis proportion and the proportion
of teachers who adopt this procedure (9 per cent) suggests that the latter may
have written work from more students to deal with than those who discuss
students’ work with them. The practice of returning students’ work with only
written comment is most usual in applied science, where 30 per cent of students
were so dealt with, and least common in arts (7 per cent). More pass students
than honours students have to be content with only written comment, the
respective proportions being 19 per cent and 11 per cent.

230. Overall 74 per cent of students regularly (at least once a term) prepare
written work for criticism, and have that work discussed in discussion periods
(whether or not it has been first handed in for the teacher to read), but there
arc wide variations in this proportion between faculty groups. Of students of
arts 87 per cent receive this treatment, of students of pure science, 70 per cent,
and of students of applied science, 46 per cent.

231. These inter-faculty differences are great enough seriously to invalidate
inter-university comparisons unless the figures for the university groups are

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

compared with standardised averages allowing for differences in the balance of
studies in the way described in para. 129, Chapter V. Such comparisons are
made in Table 7.5.

Table 7.5. Proportion of students whose written work is discussed
in discussion periods

Actual

Standardised

Average

Actual greater (+)
or less (— )
than standardised
average

Per cent

Oxford and Cambridge

92-2

79-3

-H2-9

London

73-2

73-8

— 0-6

Other English:
Larger Civic

68-0

69-6

- 1-6

Smaller Civic

78-5

78-8

- 0-3

Wales

73-0

74-3

- 1-3

Scotland

62-8

73-2

-10-4

Source: Main Student Survey.

(iii) THE USES OF LECTURES AND DISCUSSION
PERIODS

232. Since lectures and discussion periods are commonly considered as
alternative methods of teaching we have dealt with them in a single chapter,
which we conclude with some observations on their respective uses and on the
extent to which they are really alternative or necessarily complementary.

233. In every student’s course there needs to be some basic teaching in which
he is provided with a framework for his studies. In such teaching he is given
an outline of the subject and a. review of the literature which he should study.
He receives in it an introduction to the basic principles and ways of thought
which have proved themselves best in the subject, and, in subjects of controversy,
he gets a balanced picture of the main schools of thought. The function of such
teaching is not to provide detailed information but rather to tell the student
where the detailed information can be found, provide him with outlines to fill
in for himself, and warn him of the various forms of bias which he may find
in the literature.

234. In most disciplines at most universities this kind of teaching is given by
lectures, and there are important advantages in doing it in this way. It can be
said that there is a certain body of basic information which is the same for all
students in the course and which should therefore be given to them all at the
same time if wasteful repetition is to be avoided. Moreover, this kind of teaching
may be most effective if it is given in a continuous logical exposition which has
been thought out beforehand and can be kept free from interruptions and
digressions.

235. Lectures however are not used for this purpose in all disciplines at all
universities. It is possible to give basic or framework teaching in small tutorials,
and it is arguable that this is the best way of doing it. Perhaps the strongest
objection to giving framework teaching by lecture is that the prescription is the

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

same for all students at the same stage of the same course. Lectures wliich go
fast enough for the quicker students will go too fast for the slower. To some
extent these difficulties can be overcome by grouping students according to
ability for ancillary seminar or tutorial teaching, but as long as the lectures
are common to all students in a particular year of a particular course the
dilemma, that either the abler are not extended or the less able taken out of
their stride, cannot be wholly avoided. Moreover, as students develop, their
interests begin to diverge. Every student is an individual with his own pace and
his own interests, and the advantage of using the tutorial for basic or framework
teaching is that each student can be prescribed for individually.

236. There are thus two possible systems, one in which basic or framework
teaching is given by lecture, and tutorial, seminar, and class teaching is ancillary
and geared to the lecture course; another in which basic or framework teaching
is given by tutorial, and the student is advised to attend such lectures and other
classes as his tutor or director of studies considers to be suitable for his abilities
and interests. We do not say that either of these systems is better than the other.
The system which is best for one subject or field of study in one university is
not necessarily best for that subject or field of study at another university, or
for a different subject or field of study at any university; and the choice between
these systems in any given case may be nicely balanced. But we believe that the
systems in operation at many, perhaps most, universities result from adherence
to tradition, and have not been adopted by deliberate choice after weighing
the relative advantages and disadvantages.

237. While lectures and discussion periods are alternative means of providing
the framework and basic teaching for the student’s course, they are in other
respects complementary rather than alternative. Whichever form of basic
teaching is adopted, lectures and discussion periods each have distinctive and
essential functions. Lectures should be available covering those parts of a
course in which there is no satisfactory literature, or in wlrich the literature is
scattered and the information in it requires organising for student consumption.
They should also be available from lecturers whose personality, enthusiasm, or
originality enables them to present their subjects in a way which will be
stimulating to students.

238. While the lecture has essential functions in any system of teaching, the
usual danger in universities is not that there will not be enongh lectures, but
that there will be too many. Lecturing, and particularly lecturing to honours
or specialist students, is often considered to be the most honorific or responsible
part of teaching. Some members of staff feel it to be a reflection on their
competence if they are not invited to lecture, and this attitude may make it
difficult in large departments to confine the number of lectures offered to those
that are really necessary. It has been said that ‘overindulgence in lectures should
be classed as a drug of addiction in relation to both giver and receiver’. To
lecture should not be regarded as either the automatic duty or the right of a
university teacher.

239. One reason for teaching by lecture which was given to us in the evidence
we received was that owing to their immaturity students learn more readily by
listening to lectures than by reading. This may well be so, but the danger is
that unless students are encouraged to go and find what they want in books or
by observation instead of expecting it to be provided for them in lectures, their
immaturity may be perpetuated. If learning to work on their own should be

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

one of the main lessons which they learn at the university, they should acquire
their information by reading and observation so far as it is practicable for them
to do so. If this is accepted, there are still three important functions for the
lecture. The first, where basic teaching is given by lecture, is to give students a
framework for their reading and guidance on what to read; next, however
basic teaching is given, to provide them with information or to show tliem a
point of view which, for whatever reason, is not available in a suitable form in
the literature of the subject; and finally to kindle their enthusiasm and stimulate
their thought through listening to an inspiring lecturer.

240. We now come to the use in teaching of discussion periods and written
woii prepared by students in their own time. While we agree that the discussion
period has the limitations summarised in para. 200, we are clear that it lias a
vital part to play in university teaching. Recent research into the learning
process has led to increasing recognition of the importance of active participation
by the student, who should not merely exercise his mind upon what he is being
taught, but should be required to communicate what he is thinking to the teacher,
who can then immediately assess his response. The weakness of the lecture a.s
a sole method of teaching is the absence of a response from the student, from
whom no immediate ‘feed-back’ is obtained by the teacher. It at a vital point
in the argument of a lecture the student misunderstands or lets his attention
wander, not only may the rest of the lecture be wasted, so far as that student
is concerned, but his subsequent progress in that part of the subject may be
prejudiced if his misunderstanding is left uncorrected. If teaching is to be
effective, lectures need to be supplemented by requiring the .student to do
something in the way of an exercise, in which he will put to the test what he thinks
he has learnt, and which, so far as it is imperfectly done, will show his teacher
the gaps in his knowledge and understanding.

241. The case for the discussion period is that, rightly handled, it provides for
active participation by the student and for immediate assessment of hi.s efforts.
It may be argued that the terminal or sessional examination provides for this,
but the disadvantage of relying on periodical examinations is that the interval
between the student’s misunderstanding and its disclosure is too long. The
damage done by the misunderstanding increases the longer it is left uncorrcctcd.

242. The report of the Bridges Syndicate at Cambridge already referred to
contains some observations on the use of discussion periods. The memoranda
which the Syndicate received from Senior Tutors agreed that supervision ‘is
directed to fostering an undergraduate’s general intellectual development, by
stimulating his interests and widening his outlook as well as by overseeing his
general progress and, perhaps above all, by teaching him how to make the best
use of his abilities and to learn how to study and master a subject for himself’.
However, ‘there is a tendency for supervision to assume much more the character
of a small instructional class, of which the purpose is to make certain that the
undergraduate has properly understood and learned the facts in a particular
branch of his subject’.*

243. This tendency is attributed partly to the increasing specialisation of
teachers and partly to the fact that undergraduates ‘like not only to use super-
vision as the medium through which to seek explanations of any specific points
in their lectures which they have not understood, but also to regard it as the
discipline by which their progress in acquiring factual knowledge will bo regularly
probed and they will be kept up to the mark’. This is described as ‘coaching’,

* ibid., paras 55 and 56.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

and the term is used in a pejorative sense; the Syndicate speak of the need to
save supervision ‘from possible deterioration into coaching for the Tripos’.
The Syndicate therefore favour a reduction in the amount of supervision, but
it will have been noted from Table 6.4 that while most Cambridge students
are satisfied with the amount of supervision they get, those who would like
more are far more numerous than those who would like less.

244. Some universities appear to use discussion periods in a way which is not
easy to distinguish from the ‘coaching’ of which the Bridges Syndicate speak
with disapproval. One university, for example, recognises a type of discussion
period ‘where there is factual instruction concentrating on the student’s weaker
points’; another mentions, as the first of several ‘chief advantages’ of small-
group teaching, that it ‘enables the difficulties of individual students to be
discovered and dealt with’; a third describes the tutorial system as the best
available for the purposes it is intended to serve, one of which is ‘the elucidation
of difficulties’; and a fourth admits frankly that ‘some men need individual
coaching’. The view that the main purpose of small-group teaching is to remove
students’ difficulties is implicit in the comment made by one university that it is
‘unsuitable for the very clever student who has few difficulties’.

245. There seem to us to be two respects in which coaching may be open to
objection. The term ‘coaching’ is defined in the dictionary as teaching for an
examination, and there is undoubtedly a form of teaching which is too closely
geared to examinations, for example, where the student is taught more with a
view to the supposed probability of particular questions being set than to give
him a connected grasp of his subject as a whole. The Bridges Syndicate clearly
have this in mind when they speak of ‘deterioration into coaching for the Tripos’.
The avoidance of such teaching is to some extent a problem for examiners, and
we shall revert to it in dealing with examinations. There is also a further
difference, which seems to us to be important, between coaching and the kind
of teaching by discussion which is to be regarded with approval. The term
‘coaching’, when used in a pejorative sense, evokes a picture of a student who
looks to his coach rather than to his own eff'orts to maintain his momentum
and to help him over the difficulties of his course. In our view good teaching
by discussion is that for which an antecedent effort is required from the student.

246. There is no better way of evoking this effort than by setting the student,
to be done in his own time, an essay or some other written exercise for which
fairly extensive preparation will be necessary, and which will be criticised and
discussed at the next meeting. A written exercise of this kind is not only of
value in ensuring that the student has worked at the topic which will then be
discussed. It is also of value in training him to work on his own, and to read
the literature of the subject with an alert and critical mind. It helps him to give
coherence and clarity to his thinking, and trains him in the necessary art of
using language and communicating his ideas to others. To some extent class
examinations fulfil this function, but not, in our view, as effectively, since the
value to the student of the written exercise prepared for a discussion period is
largely derived from the oral comment which it there receives and the discussion
which should follow. Teaching by discussion and written work done in the
student’s own time are in our view inseparable. Such teaching cannot have its
full value unless the student has first made the intellectual effort needed to
produce something on paper; and a written exercise cannot have its full value
for him unless it is followed by oral comment and discussion.

(90678) ^

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

247. We should make it clear that our views on the importance of discussion
periods and written work done by students in their own time apply to science
as well as to arts. At Oxford and Cambridge the time spent in tutorials by
science students is not significantly less than that so spent by arts students.
Elsewhere science students spend little time in tutorials. If the upper limit of
size of a tutorial class is taken as four, there is no other university group where
the average weekly time spent by science students in tutorials is more than
0-3 hour, which means an average of one in three weeks; and even if the upper
limit of size is raised to nine to include small seminars, the average weekly
hours still range between 0-6 (pure science at the smaller civic universities) and
0 ■ 1 (applied science in Scotland). It is sometimes suggested that for scientists
the practical class is a substitute for the small discussion group. It docs of
course provide staff-student contact, but interchanges at a practical class
between demonstrator and student are at least as likely to be about the details
of an experiment as about fundamentals. Reliance on practical classes to provide
opportunities for discussion between staff and students runs the risk that
discussion, at any rate in a large class, will fail to attain the quality and depth
attainable at a tutorial or small seminar for which the student has adequately
prepared his mind.

248. We sometimes fear that the enthusiasm of many students for more teaching
by discussion is derived from the expectation that it will save them trouble and
make things easy. Such expectations should be disappointed. It is no kindness
to a student to relieve him of the intellectual effort without which he cannot
get the benefit he should from a university course. The introduction of more
teaching by discussion is beneficial only when it can be matched by a corres-
ponding increase in the amount of private study done by the student, so that
he comes to the meeting after having done some work for it, which should
normally take the form of preparing an essay or other written work for criticism
and discussion. Provided that this is the main use of such teaching, we see no
reason why it should not also be used for elucidating difficulties and for checking
up on the student’s progress. These are desirable and indeed necessary purposes,
provided that they are not so done as to relieve the student of the need for effort
or to make him unduly dependent on his teacher.

249. It follows from what we have said about the function of teaching by
discussion that we think that the amount of such teaching which can usefully
be given to a student is limited. We return to the point that the main purpose
of a university education, apart from the acquisition of knowledge, should be
to teach the student to work on his own and think for himself. This means that
the work required for each tutorial or seminar should be substantial. The
assignment of time to such teaching should start from an assessment of the time
which the student can reasonably be expected to make available for the neces.sary
preparation. The number of discussion periods which can usefully be given to
a student depends on his capacity, the difficulty and scope of the exercises set,
and the time required for their preparation, and no general rule can therefore
be laid down on frequency. One meeting a week would be sufficient if the task
set for the next meeting were such as to give the student plenty to do in the
time not committed to lectures and other classes. Teaching by discussion, rightly
used, is a way of making the student do for himself what is too often done for
him, and if it is used in this way we do not think that it should be unduly
expensive or burdensome on staff.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter VIII

PRACTICAL CLASSES

250. Adequately to comment on practical work as a vehicle for university
teaching demands far more detailed information than can be obtained from our
present enquiry. Yet the subject is an important one, since the resources required
for this purpose, especially in departments of science and technology, whether
in teaching and technical staff, in laboratory space or in apparatus and equipment,
are substantial.

251. Even if field work in the social and biological sciences is excluded,
practical work in the laboratory may take on a great variety of forms ranging
from the set experiment, planned in detail with its accompanying instruction
sheet and occupying the period of a single practical class, to the ‘open-ended’
research project in the later years differing only in scope and duration from the
work of a postgraduate research student. The students concerned may work
singly, in pairs, or even in groups ; practical work may progress step by step
with the lecture course to which it forms an extension, or it may be quite
unrelated to the topics of theoretical instruction which are being studied at the
same time. A laboratory may be set up with a group of experiments which are
unchanged over a long period, the students rotating between them as each
experiment is completed, or the class material may be changed at every practical,
each student being provided with identical equipment or specimens. The
university examinations may include practical papers; or assessment of the
student’s practical ability may be based entirely on the work done during his
normal laboratory practice.

252. For these and many other reasons, generalisations about practical work
based on faculty or university averages are of limited value. Students of pure
science spend a slightly smaller proportion (44 per cent) of their time at practical
classes than they do in lectures (48 per cent) but since these figures include
mathematicians the reverse is probably the case for the experimental sciences.
This would be consistent with information gained from university representatives,
who quoted figures to us which suggest that a proportion of 4 or 5 lecture hours
to 6 hours of practical work is common practice in many science subjects.
Students in the applied sciences somewhat surprisingly spend considerably more
time at lectures (54 per cent) than in practical classes (35 per cent). This ratio
reflects a substantially larger number of lecture hours (10-8 as compared with
8-3) and a smaller number of hours of practical work (6-9 as compared with
7-8) than those for pure science. These are averages, and individual
universities quoted examples where 18-21 hours per week were spent in practical
classes.

253. The sizes of practical classes reported in the main student survey are
shown in Table 8.1.

(90678) F 2

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 8.1. Student Attendances at practical classes of various
sizes by faculties

Attendances at practicals

Size of Class

Pure Science

Applied Science

Per cent

5-9

10-19

20-100

Over 100

All classes

100

Number of attendances . .

3,105

1,948

Source: Main Student Survey.

University teachers were also asked to give the number of practical classes which
they instructed during the period covered by their survey. The results of the
two surveys are not altogether consistent as to the proportions of very small
classes, possibly because the distinction between the practical class and the
discussion period was not uniformly applied. They are consistent, however, in
the proportions of classes of 20 and over, on the assumption that the average
attendance at classes of 20-100 was about 50. They are also consistent in showing
that practical classes in pure science tend to run larger than in applied .science.
254. There was not a great deal of difference between university groups in
size of practical classes except that in Scotland 12 per cent of attendances were
at classes of over 100, as against a national average of 5 per cent. The main
differences were between years and degrees of specialisation, and the.sc are
shown in Table 8.2.

Table 8.2. Student Attendanees at practieal classes by year and
specialisation of course

Size of Class

First year

Other

non-final

year

Final Year

Specialists

Non-specialists

Per cent

5-9

10-19

20-100

Over 100

All classes

100

Number of attendances . .

1,958

2,364

810

288

Source: Main Student Survey.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

255. It should not of course be assumed that students who attend large practical
classes necessarily get less contact with stalf than those who attend small ones.
It is usual for teachers conducting the larger classes to be assisted by one or
more demonstrators. Table 8.3 shows, for practical classes of each of five
ranges of size, the proportions of student attendances at classes with various
numbers of staff present.

Table 8.3. Student Attendances at Practicals by size of
Class and Number of Staff Present

Number of staff present

Size of Class

1-4

5-9

10-19

20-100

1004-

Per cent

One

Two

Three

Four

Five or more

All cla.ssCvS

100

Number of attendances

222

389

1,159

3,356

249

Source: Main Student Survey.

Thus at most classes of 10 and over there was more than one member of staff
present, and at most classes of 20 and over there were more than two.

256. Many university science teachers emphasised to us the great value of
practical classes in bringing students and their teachers together for informal
discussions of the subject (though it was agreed that as numbers rise the value
diminishes); and the common employment of graduate research students as
demonstrators was generally approved as assisting in this function. Furthermore,
the close contact of senior teachers with these graduate demonstrators helped
both in training the latter in their teaching duties and in assessing their value
as potential university lecturers. It was noteworthy that heads of science
departments were much more confident about their ability to judge the teaching
ability of younger members of their staff than were heads of other departments,
and were also less inclined to feel the need for instruction in teaching methods
for young lecturers.

257. Apart from this useful function of bringing teachers, research workers
and students into close personal contact, what other purposes are served by
a practical class? We might summarise these purposes under five main headings:

(i) To train the student in manipulative skill.

(ii) To introduce him to a range of techniques and instruments.

(iii) To illustrate, supplement, and emphasise points from lectures or
private reading.

(iv) To train him to write an experimental report, based upon a properly-
kept laboratory notebook.

(v) To give him some sort of critical awareness ofthe nature and organisation
of a well-designed experiment.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

258. The extent to which different subjects require training in these live
purposes will of course vary greatly with the subject. Thus the illustration and
supplementation of points from lectures (or from personal reading) is tar niore
important in the biological sciences and in geology and geograpliy, wheie held
work as well as laboratory dissection and study of the material gives a three-
dimensional vividness which no amount of theoretical study can adequately
replace. Training in manipulative skill, important in such subjects as chemistry
and biology, is possibly less important in physics and engineering where the
handling of experimental data and the critical appreciation ot experimental
design play a relatively larger part in practical laboratory work.

259. It is universally accepted that practical work is essential for the student
in subjects where it is appropriate; and most universities make attendance at
practical classes obligatory. What is not so evident is whether the time spent
at present on such practical work is fully and profitably used. Sixly-thicc per
cent of students were satisfied with the amount of practical work in their couises,
23 per cent would like less and only 14 per cent would like more--a higher
degree of approval than with any other aspect of their teaching. Unfortunately
the question was not put to university teachers in this form, the distinction being
made only between lectures and ‘other teaching’. While a substantial minority
(about 25 per cent) of teachers would like to see lecturing time reduced, the
50 per cent who would like to see other forms of teaching increased may well
have been referring to tutorials and seminars. It may be significant that the
figure of approximately 50 per cent is roughly the same for all subjects, whether
or not practical work is appropriate.

260. In many universities where three or more practical subjects may be
taken together in the early years, these laboratory classes may occupy 18-20
hours per week, so that the time spent in the laboratory could not reasonably
be increased; indeed the comments that have been made to us about the frequent
inability of science students to write coherently and well suggest that more
time might profitably be spent on such work as essays, even at the expense of a
reduction in their practicals. In Physics, where the load of practical classes is
on the whole less than in Chemistry, Biology, and applied sciences, Professor
Chambers* has suggested that the time spent on practical work could be halved
with considerable advantage to the student. Not every physicist will share his
opinion, and the biologists and chemists who ask for substantially more practical
time than physicists may have good reason for doing so, in view of the great
importance of manipulative skill in these subjects. But the demand by .students
as well as by their teachers for more time spent on tutorial and discussion
classes can only be satisfactorily met if the student spends substantially more
of his time on private study. One of the obvious ways to make more time
available for this purpose would be by reducing the length of his practical
classes.

261. A further advantage of such a reduction might be to increase the efiiciency
of utilisation of the laboratories in certain subjects. It is often the case that the
limitation in student numbers in many science departments is determined by
the capacity of the laboratory accommodation; this is particularly true where
the student has open access to a fixed place in the laboratory at all times when

* Chambers, R.G. 1963. What use are practical physics classes? Bull, of The Institute of
Physics and The Physical Society, vol. 14, pages 181-183; 1964. A Survey of Laboratory
Teaching, op. cit., Vol. 15, pages 77ff.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

the university is in session. Where, however, a fixed group of experiments is
set up in a teaching laboratory, a more or less continuous turnover of students
becomes possible; the capacity of the laboratory is then determined not only
by its size but by the rate of turnover. An extreme case of this is found in a
recent first-year course in biology at Harvard,* where a laboratory, accom-
modating 25 students at any one time, provides a very carefully designed
tiiree-hour practical in shifts on several teaching days per week, thus handling
a class of 350. Such a scheme makes heavy though not necessarily disproportion-
ate demands on technical and teaching staff, but because of its economy in
space and equipment it makes possible the inclusion of experiments which are
more ambitious than those employed in most similar courses in this country.

262. While there is clearly no substitute for the practice which is needed to
acquire a certain degree of manipulative skill, some of the expertise which is
involved in the treatment of experimental results can be learned outside the
laboratory, and exercise classes to deal with such subjects as statistical method
and presentation and handling of data are not uncommon. Demorrstration
experiments in lectures are nowadays out of favour, and justifiably so; they
arc largely a relic of the days when laboratory practice was non-existent. But
there is certainly still a useful place for demonstration of techniques in the
laboratory, and modern methods employing closed-circuit television and films
can make accessible to the student techniques and materials which would
otherwise be barred to him. The Department of Physics at Manchesterf has even
successfully made use of closed-circuit television to carry out practical W'ork
in large student groups in the form of ‘experimental seminars’.

263. Besides practical classes, certain other work of a practical nature is
commonly required of students in certain subjects — for instance, drawing office
classes for engineers, and examples classes for subjects with a mathematical
content. Comments on these follow.

Drawing Office Classes

264. Most cour.ses of engineering, particularly civil and mechanical, require
from their students an adequate mastery of the technique of engineering
drawing, and drawing office classes form a fairly substantial part of the total
teaching programme. There is no doubt that conversation over a drawing board
can be a highly educative process for engineers, particularly where the class
is a small one or is generously staffed so that the instructor is not under pressure
to ‘get round’ as quickly as possible. Such conversations correspond closely to
those which chemists or biologists have over the laboratory bench, and require
no justification from us.

265. In what goes on in the drawing office, one can distinguish several different
elements, not all of the same educational value. First, the undergraduate has to
learn the language and the technique of drawing. This kind of work has not
much in common with the rest of the engineering curriculum, and in some
universities it is taught by instructors who are specialists in this field. Secondly,
there is the development of the spatial sense which enables one to visualise in
three dimensions what is represented in the plane, or indeed to represent on a

* 26 Afternoons of Biology, Wald et al. (Addison-Wesley, 1961).

t R. G. Conway et al. 1963, Bulletin of the Institute of Physics and The Physical Society,
14, 330.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

plane what exists in three dimensions. Traditional courses of enginceiing
drawing have consisted largely of these two elements. It seems to us that this
sort of work, which is likely to be as necessary as in the past, is one in which
visual aids, films and film strips, programmed learning, and so on, are likely
to be of increasing value.

266. There is, however, a third element which ought always to be present.
Engineering drawing is for all engineers a useful technique, but it only becomes
something more, an intellectual discipline which can stand on its own, when
an element of creativeness enters into it — when drawing as a subject is replaced
by ‘design’. The Fielden Committee’s report* has drawn attention to the
difficulties of recruiting good engineering designers at the present time, and in
that report the arguments about the education of designers are set out at greater
length than is appropriate here. We wish only to suggest that this is a field to
which more thought and study should be given by university engineering
departments. The view widely held that instruction in the creative aspects of
design is something that can only be undertaken at postgraduate levels is one
that should not be accepted without scrutiny.

Examples Classes

267. In subjects which have a mathematical basis — Physics, Chemistry,
Engineering, and Mathematics itself— it is common practice to provide a certain
number of ‘examples classes’ in which students work out problems and can be
helped with any difficulties which they may encounter in doing so. They are
usually linked very closely with a set of lectures, and the lecturer often provides
the problems to be solved. Commonly, such classes may require one member
of the teaching staff for every 20 or 30 students; so that if the lecture audience
is a large one, it is probable that either additional staff will have to be present,
or the class will have to be divided into several ‘examples classes’. The former
alternative enables graduate students or inexperienced staff to be given useful
practice in teaching under supervision. This pattern of study is very common in
the United States.

268. In commenting on the ‘examples class’, we would wish to make only
the following points :

(a) There is no doubt that work of this kind is very helpful in ensuring that
the student understands the principles of the subject and can apply
them. However, too much time devoted to this kind of activity may
give the student the impression that the solution of problems, which
are often of a rather routine character, is all that is required of him.

(b) In such a situation, it is not easy for the teacher to go deeply into the
principles involved in the subject studied. He is concerned more with
detecting errors and with the technique of problem-solving. Accordingly
we regard such classes as particularly suited for students for whom
the subject is ancillary (e.g., mathematics for engineers). Specialists
need tutorials of the kind which we have discussed in the last chapter,
and for them we think tliat ‘examples classes’ should supplement
tutorials and not be a substitute for them.

♦ Engineering Design ; Report of the Committee appointed by the Council for Scientific
and Industrial Research to consider the present standing in Mechanical Engineering Design.
H.M.S.O. 1963. 6 B B

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

(c) The ‘examples class’ provides one of the best sources of ‘feed-back’ to
lectures. If a point has not been made clear in a lecture, the fact will
very soon be apparent in the ‘examples class’. It is for this reason
desirable that a lecturer should be personally responsible for at least
one of the ‘examples classes’ associated with his lectures.

269. In conclusion, what seem to us to be most needed in a time of rapid
university expansion are critical studies, subject by subject, such as those now
being initiated at the University of Bristol, of the role of practical and other
similar classes in the education of the student and a thorough re-examination of
existing practice in the light of this study. The ruthless pruning of practical
exercises which are included merely because they are easy to provide, or fool-
proof, or traditional, could, for example, set free the time and space for students
to work singly instead of in pairs, for the individual student to spend more
time on work of real value to him, and for the teacher on his part to be more
profitably employed.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter IX

EXAMINATIONS

270. Teaching and examinations are so interlocked in our higher educational
system, and examinations loom so large in the student’s academic life, that our
report would be incomplete without some discussion of examinations. The
sixth-form pupil who aspires to a graduate’s career will already have been
attuned by experience, e.g. of the ‘O’ level Examinations for the G.C.E., to the
idea that examinations will determine his success in life, and he sees before him
a series of further examination hurdles which must be surmounted before he
can reach his goal. The ‘A’ level Examination for the G.C.E., with perhaps a
college or departmental examination, will decide his entry into a university.
Further examinations during his university course will play an important part
in encouraging him to work to a target, whether this is expressed as a date-line,
as mastery over a given part of the course, or, within the examination itself, as
a limited time for answering a question. They will give the student a measure
of his success, will decide whether he can complete his course, and, in faculties
in which there are separate examinations for honours from those for ordinary
or pass degrees, for which type of degree he can sit. The degree examination,
which may be taken either in stages through his university course or at the end
of it, will determine the university’s final assessment of his work as an under-
graduate, which he will take into the world with him. For some careers there
are further post-university examinations in which he must succeed.

271. In our questions to universities we asked whether it was considered that,
where lectures are the main vehicle for teaching, an attempt should be made to
cover the whole syllabus with lectures, or whether the student might be expected,
in his final examination, to answer questions which had not been dealt with in
any lectures available to him. For some courses at some universities no detailed
syllabus is laid down, and the scope of the lecture courses given to students
determines the scope of the degree examinations. Whether or not there is a
detailed syllabus, the normal practice appears to be to try to cover the whole
of the ground by lectures, but only in broad scope and principle, the student
being expected to do much reading for himself. In many, perhaps most, university
degree examinations, a student would be unable to earn high marks from
lecture notes alone, but in some courses at some universities the student is not
expected to answer questions which have not been dealt with in lectures. In
any case the range of knowledge expected of him will be laid down for him,
and reading will normally be recommended to him in which he can find all that
he needs to know to do himself credit in examinations,

272. The student who is more interested in his career than in his subject will
thus be in a position to confine his studies to what is necessary for success in
his examinations, and he will hope to find, and will normally find, teaching
which is more or less closely geared to that particular objective. The more
vocational the course he is taking, the more marked this attitude is likely to be.
We are not saying that the student who approaches his university studies in this

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

way will necessarily fail to derive educational benefit from his course. But
whether he does so or not will depend on the way in which the syllabus of his
course has been framed, and on the nature of the questions customarily set in
the examinations with which it ends, as much as on the way in which he has
been taught. The problem for tliose who determine the scope and character of
examinations and who set and mark them is to avoid creating a conflict between
what the career-minded student regards as his interest and what an enlightened
teacher would regard as educationally desirable. The student whose main
object is to pass his examinations should of course be put into a position to
do so, but he should be unable to avoid being educated in the process.

273. In such a system the examiner may appear to be the dominant partner,
whose fault it will be if anything is seriously amiss with the teaching. Such a
point of view, however, presupposes that teachers and examiners are difierent
people, and it is one of the features of our universities, as distinct from schools,
that they are not. There are, however, considerable variations in the extent
to which the student’s teacher and his examiner are the same person.

274. There are two distinct methods of conducting degree examinations, the
difference arising from differences of organisation between universities. In
some universities which are organised on a collegiate basis, a substantial part
of undergraduate teaching is the responsibility of the constituent colleges, while
the degree examinations are conducted by the university. To conduct each
examination the university appoints a board of examiners, one or more of whom
are commonly from outside the university, the remainder being a limited number,
specially appointed for one or more years, of the teachers of the subject concerned
in the university. The members of the board (sometimes with the help of assessors
or assistant examiners) compose the question papers, mark the candidates’
scripts, and decide the results. The second method is normal in unitary
universities in which the whole of the teaching is the responsibility of the
university and there is one department in each subject. Here students of any
subject, after being taught by the staff of the university department responsible
for that subject, are then examined by an external examiner and by the staff
of that department as a whole, each teacher usually doing the bulk of the
examining on his own special topics. These two methods arise from the structure
of the universities, but they have different effects on teaching and on staff-
student relationships, and the advantages are not all clearly with one method
rather than the other.

275. The first or ‘board’ system means that the examination may be conducted
on a syllabus, more or less precisely defined, and even where it is not, its scope
is usually governed by traditions or conventions which change only slowly.
Under this system the teacher has, at least to a certain extent, to teach for
an examination. With teaching geared to the syllabus or to the traditional
scope of a course, new methods of approach to a subject can only be introduced
gradually, and, a more serious matter, obsolete material can only be dropped
with difficulty. A certain degree of stability in the scope of a given course is,
however, necessary in fairness to students. The ‘board’ system has also the
important advantage that, when the teacher and the examiner are not the same
person, the student can dissociate teacher from examiner, and can freely disclose
all his difficulties to his teacher in the confidence that his teacher’s knowledge
of his weaknesses will not prejudice his success in the degree examinations. It

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

must of course happen on occasions that a student’s tutor will be a member of
the board of examiners, but where there is a convention that a tutor sits silent
at examiners’ meetings while his pupil’s fate is being decided, the advantage
we have mentioned need not be wholly lost when the tutor is an examiner if the
tutor explains this convention to his pupil.

276. The second method has the advantage that the examination need not
dominate the teaching but can depend on it. A course can be drastically changed
whenever it is thought desirable, and obsolete material can be omitted, the
subsequent examination being adjusted accordingly. Again there is little question
of competition between teachers over the relative success of their students, and
there is therefore less temptation to teach with too much regard for the student’s
performance in the examination. Moreover, the examination need not be the
only factor in the final assessment of the student’s quality. The second method
makes it possible to base the final assessment of the student partly on his work
during his course, and not only on his performance in the examinations. We
revert later to the question whether it should be so based.

277. On the other hand it can be said that, to the extent to which the final
assessment of the student is in the hands of those who have taught him, there
is a risk that regard may be paid to first impressions which are no longer valid,
and to shortcomings which have been outgrown. A further disadvantage is that
where the teacher is the examiner, and precisely on the branch of the subject
which he has taught, the student may be tempted to regard the lectures he has
attended as authoritative on matters on which he should be forming a judgment
between conflicting views, and as wholly self-sufficient without further reading.
He may even attempt to conceal his difficulties from a teacher who will also be
his examiner for fear that if he discloses his weaknesses his final assessment will
be prejudiced. Thus, if a teacher is also an examiner of the same students, his
task as a teacher may be made more difficult. These objections are only partly
met by the participation in the examination of an external examiner.

278. In our questionnaire to university teachers each member of the sample
was asked whether he would be taking part in 1962, officially or unofficially,
in the degree examinations of his university. To this question 85 per cent of
respondents said that they would be taking part, and nearly all (95 per cent)
of those taking part said that they would be both setting questions and marking
scripts. For Oxford and Cambridge the proportion of participants was lower
(51 per cent), but at universities other than Oxford, Cambridge, and London,
the proportion was as high as 94-95 per cent. In the universities as a whole the
proportion of heads of departments participating was higher (94 per cent) than
the overall average. This is what might be expected; it is more interesting that
even among assistant lecturers and demonstrators the proportion of participants
was no less than 73 per cent.

279. Those with past experience of setting questions for degree examinations
also represented 85 per cent of respondents, so that the answers to our further
questions were in most cases based on direct experience of examining as well
as on observation from the point of view of a teacher. The distribution of the
85 per cent with past examining experience was different from that of the 85 per
cent participating in the 1962 examinations. The proportion with past experience
at Oxford and Cambridge was 81 per cent and elsewhere between 79 per cent
(London) and 90 per cent (Wales). Thus there was less variation between

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

university groups, but, as might be expected, more between grades, 98 per cent
of heads of departments, but only 52 per cent of assistant lecturers and
demonstrators, having had past experience.

280. Respondents with past experience were asked to what extent knowledge
of the content of the actual courses given was a determining factor in their
choice of question. Those who said that such knowledge was not a factor were
a minority, ^ and only at Oxford and Cambridge (17 per cent) were they more
than a negligible one. Elsewhere nearly all respondents said that it was a factor,
and the great majority— 80 per cent overall and 87-89 per cent outside Oxford
and Cambridge (52 per cent) and London (74 per cent)— said that it was a
major factor. These inter-university contrasts may reflect the dilferent methods
of conducting degree examinations discussed in paras. 274-8 above; they may
also to some extent reflect inter-subject differences; and still other factors may
be at work. Thus, with regard to subject differences, it may be relevant that
appreciable minorities (12 to 18 per cent) of teachers of some non-science
subjects (English, French, History, Law) said that knowledge of the content of
courses was not a factor in their choice of questions, and in English, History,
and Law, the proportions who said it was a major factor fell as low as 54 to 62
per cent. In Mathematics and Science, on the other hand, practically no res-
pondents said that it was not a factor, and in Mathematics, Chemistry, and
Engineering, 90 per cent and more said it was a major factor. There are very
real differences between subjects and legitimate variations in teachers’ views on
the proper relationship between teaching and examination, which could well
justify the range of attitude revealed by the answers to our question.

281. Each member of the sample was asked whether he considered that in his
subject the existing system of written examinations was the best practicable
method (a) of providing an incentive to students to work hard and (6) of assessing
undergraduate quality. Four out of every five respondents answered ‘yes’ to
the first question, with relatively little variation either between university groups
or between subjects. The only group in which the proportion of affirmative
answers fell below 76 per cent was Biology (71 per cent). Assistant lecturers
and demonstrators, however, were less satisfied on this point (72 per cent) than
their seniors. The prevailing view on (a) was on a number of occasions supported
by university delegations in oral evidence, and is consistent with the results of
our inquiry into the use of the vacations by students, from which it appeared
that students who faced a written test at the end of the long vacation of 1961
were markedly more diligent in that vacation than those who did not.

282. The second question — -whether the existing system of written examinations
is the best practicable method of assessing undergraduate quality — also produced
a large majority of affirmative answers, but not so large as the first question.
On this second question the majority was three out of four, with more differences
than on the first between the various groups of respondents. At Oxford and
Cambridge 82 per cent said ‘yes’, but only 68 per cent and 71 per cent in London
and Scotland respectively. There were also differences between subjects cutting
across faculty divisions, with teachers of Biology, English and Physics least
satisfied (67, 70 and 72 per cent) and teachers of Law, Mathematics and
Engineering most satisfied (83, 80 and 80 per cent). Among grades, assistant
lecturers and demonstrators were again least satisfied, with 64 per cent, and
heads of departments most satisfied, with 79 per cent.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

283. Up to this point we have been considering primarily official univeisity
examinations, which commonly take place at intervals, annual or other, within
the student’s course as well as at the end of it. In addition to these examinations
there are at nearly all universities a number of departmental or college
examinations or tests which are not a formal requirement of the univeisity,
but which enable both teacher and student to check on the student s pi ogress.
Members of the university teachers’ sample were asked whether they habitually
helped to conduct such tests. Overall, two out of every three of the sample said
that they did so, 30 per cent annually and 37 per cent more frequently. Cambridge
is an exception here, only 16 per cent of respondents from that university
participating in such tests. Elsewhere the proportion participating was 72 per
cent, the range of variation being from 66 per cent in Scotland to 87 per cent
in Wales. In Scotland no fewer than 58 of the 66 per cent take part more
frequently than once a year. The proportion of science teachers taking part in
informal tests tends to be lower — under 66 per cent except in Chemistry (72 per
cent) — ^than that of arts teachers (e.g. 79 per cent in English and 82 per cent in
French, but, exceptionally, only 58 per cent in Economics). Thus the proportion
of university teachers taking part in informal tests, though nearly everywhere
considerable, is not as high, except at Oxford, as that participating in degree
examinations.

284. Respondents participating in departmental or college tests were asked
whether they returned corrected papers to the students or whether they went
through the papers witli the students who had worked them. Over 70 per cent
did one or the other or both. In Scotland the proportion was as high as 83 per
cent; elsewhere there was little variation. It seems to most of us that if a student
is to obtain the full benefit of writing an informal examination of this kind he
should see his corrected papers, and should have an opportunity of discussing
them with his teacher, who might also be assisted by such a discussion. The
other view springs from the feeling that to return and discuss corrected
examination scripts with students may make them more examination-minded.

285. The evident frequency of departmental and college examinations in
addition to university examinations must raise a doubt whether some students
are not over-examined. Each university teacher in our sample was asked whether
in his view the students he taught had to sit examinations too often, with about
the right frequency, or not often enough. Four out of every five were satisfied
with the frequency of examinations; of the minority who were not, those who
thought it too great were twice as numerous as those who took the opposite
view. Among university groups the proportion satisfied nowhere fell below
74 per cent. It was lowest in Wales and Scotland, where about one in five of
the sample considered that examinations were too frequent.’" Among grades,
heads of departments were most satisfied (86 per cent) and assistant lecturers
and demonstrators least satisfied (74 per cent). Among the latter the great
majority of dissentients thought examinations too frequent.

286. Finally, we asked each university teacher in our sample whether he
considered that the examinations taken by his students had an influence on the
teaching of his subject which was good, neutral, or bad. Only 13 per cent of

♦ At Oxford, exceptionally, most of the dissatisfied minority (13 of 17 per cent) thought
examinations not frequent enough, but Oxford is exceptional in that most undergraduates
there have no formal university test which they must pass between the preliminary examination
and final Schools.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

respondents (7 per cent of heads of departments, but 22 per cent of assistant
lectureis and demonstrators) considered that it was bad; of the satisfied
majority those who considered it neutral were in general about twice as
numerous as those who considered it good, but among heads of departments
no fewer than 44 per cent thought it positively good. Variations of opinion
between university groups were not large and were doubtfully significant.
Among subjects the highest proportions of dissatisfaction were in Mathematics
(22 pel cent) and English (20 per cent) and the lowest in Geography (7 per cent)
and Engineering (8 per cent).

287. Thus, broadly speaking, it may be seen that university teachers as a
whole regard their examination arrangements with satisfaction, and this is
perhaps only what might be expected when the great majority of teachers
participate in the work of examining. It may be significant that most dissatisfac-
tion with examination arrangements is found among the juniors who participate
in them least, and least among heads of departments who participate most. To
those familiar with the widely dillerent examination systems used in other
countries, so much satisfaction with our own examination arrangements (at any
rate in their relation to teaching) may appear to be a little complacent. But the
pattern of examinations in this country is less uniform and more adaptable than
is popularly supposed. There is, as we have explained, more than one system,
and we have received some evidence to show that within these systems variations
have been introduced in a number of places.

288. One question which arises on any university curriculum is whether the
student should be assessed for his degree by an examination covering the whole
of his undergraduate studies, taken in his final term ; or whether his studies
should be punctuated by annual examinations, or by an examination at the end
of the first or of the second year.

289. Examinations during a course of study may be held for two reasons.

(a) The course itself may be divided into two or more self-contained courses

or parts, of which earlier courses or an earlier part must be satisfactorily
completed by the student before he passes on to later courses or a
later part. In such a case an examination, which must be passed at the
end of each year or at the end of the first or second year, will be an
essential consequence of the structure of the course. It will be an integral
part of the degree examination, which under such arrangements is taken
in stages. The course for the Ordinary degree at the Scottish universities,
described in Chapter II, para. 51, represents the greatest extent of such
subdivision.

(ft) The course may consist of the progressive and continuous study of a
subject or group of subjects, but the student may or may not be required
to sit for and pass an examination at the end of each year. Such an
examination is not inherent in the structure of the course. To hold it
reflects a decision that the continuous study of a subject over a period
of more than a year should be punctuated by periodical examinations
in order to ascertain whether the student’s progress is satisfactory. The
longest period of continuous study without official examination by the
university is found in the University of London, where a student reading
for the B.A. Hons, undergoes no such examination before his finals. At
Oxford also in some honours courses the student has to pass no official

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

university test between the preliminary examination, which is not
exacting and can be taken at, or even before, the beginning of the
three-year course, and his finals. This is not to say that at these
universities students have to sit no examinations at all belore then-
finals They usually have to sit college or departmental examinations,
which enable them and their teachers to measure their progres.s. But
a college or departmental examination cannot be fully equivalent to an
official university test; and where there is no such test before the final
examination, the final examination has to cover the whole or nearly the
whole of the student’s work as an undergiaduate.

290 The difference between these systems is not entirely clear-cut. Titus an
examination at a Scottish university at the end of the first or second year may
serve two purposes. The first is that it determines whether the student can enter an
honours course during the latter part of his studies. The second is that if he
does not enter such a course, the examination forms part of the nnal degree
examination so far as the one-year course covered by the examination is
concerned. Of these two purposes, the former is essentially the same as that
served by sessional examinations (university or departmental) elsewhere. A poor
performance in a sessional examination during an honours course in an English
university may result in the student who is allowed to continue his studies
being relegated to a less specialised course leading to an ordinary degree.

291. These differing systems embody differences of educational policy.
Arrangements under which the student has to undergo in his final teim examina-
tion on studies extending over two or more years are undoubtedly more exacting
than those under which he can qualify for his degree by shorter stages. Some
would say that the fragmentation of a student’s work into separate examinable
parts is educationally undesirable on various grounds. When the examinations
come immediately before a vacation, as is usual, the term may have ended before
it is decided what work the student will be doing during the next term, and
what teacher he will be under. Ideally these decisions should be communicated
to the student as soon as they are taken, and he should be given advice on how
to prepare for next term’s work. But there are obvious difficulties in doing this
after the end of term, and in practice he may not see any of his new teachers or
hear what work he will be doing until the beginning of next term. He will thus
be handicapped in making good use of the vacation, and in any case the reaction
from intensive preparation for the examination is likely to make him disinclined
for vacation study. Apart from this, the fragmentation of his work may prevent
him from grasping as a whole a subject which has been split into two separate
courses, and he may thus be unable to attain the depth of understanding to be
expected of a graduate. According to this view it is only by examining a student
at his most mature over the whole range of his work as an undergraduate that
a proper assessment of his quality can be obtained. Others would say that this
is too great a strain; that an interim test is needed in order that the student and
his teachers can see how he is progressing and determine how the rest of his
time as an undergraduate would best be spent; and that it is better to divide
into two parts the test on which his final assessment depends, in order to
lighten the burden of work and revision in the final year and give the student
favourable conditions in which to concentrate on his most advanced work.

292. There are also differences in the nature of the tests used to assess the
student’s quality as well as in the stages at which they are taken. The traditional

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

test is of course the familiar written examination. In this the student has to do
anything up to 12 written papers. In each paper he has a limited time, usually
three hours, in which he has either to write an essay on one of a number of
subjects, or to select and answer say four questions out of a wider choice. He
has to do these things in isolation from any form of assistance. A written exam-
ination of this kind requires in some subjects to be supplemented by other tests.
Practical tests, varying in duration from three hours to several days, play a
varying part in most science and some arts courses. In modern languages there
will be an oral test of proficiency, and some examinations in other subjects are
conducted orally.

293. To be successful in written examinations of the traditional type does
require, in addition to knowledge of the subject, certain qualities which are
useful in later life. Written examinations, however, suffer from certain short-
comings as a complete test of quality. The isolation of the student during the
traditional three-hour paper may place a premium on unintelligent memorisa-
tion, and may tempt him to prepare for it by learning lecture notes by heart
for regurgitation in the examination hall. This can be a very serious danger,
since an examination which is merely a test of memorisation has a deplorable
influence on learning and teaching.

294. Another objection to exclusive reliance on the normal written examination
is that it puts an excessive premium on the student’s power, in a very limited
time, to organise his thoughts and to write concise answers to questions of
which he has not had previous warning. The power to do this is an important
quality and is rightly tested, but there are other powers which should be taken
into account in assessing a student’s quality, particularly the power to deal with
a subject or problem requiring more extensive treatment and longer reflection
than are possible under examination conditions, and the power of exposition
by word of mouth. There is also the purely practical problem of temporary
under-fitness, or complete unfitness, during the relatively brief examination
period.

295. Various means have been adopted to meet these objections to written
examinations of traditional type. Pressure on time is sometimes lightened in
some subjects by a reduction in the number of questions which a candidate
must answer, though here the examiner has the problem of deciding how wide
a choice of questions his paper should give, and must balance the pressure of
‘writing against time’ against the possibility of the student’s narrowing the range
of his woi'k. A few departments have conducted experiments in which the usual
written examination is replaced by tests of the ‘open book’ type, the object
being of course to reduce the undue advantage which under the customary
examination conditions may be obtained by diligent memorisation.

296. More widespread is the practice which seems to be growing of taking into
account the quality of the student’s work during the course, so that teaching
and assessment run concurrently and the distinction between coursework and
formal examination exercises loses its sharpness. It is increasingly common in
science courses to take account, in the final examination, of the quality shown
by students’ performance in projects, practical work, or field courses. The
quality of such work may give a better indication of the student’s potential for
independent work than the traditional examination, and it is arguable that an

(90678) G

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

examiner who knows nothing of a student but his examination performance is
not so well placed to assess his quality as one who has observed him over months
and years.

297. An example of continuous assessment is the proposal of the University
of East Anglia that one third to one half of the marks in the degree examination
in certain subjects .should be awarded for the student’s performance in a .series
of 12 seminars spread over seven terms. Such arrangements, as we have pointed
out in para. 277, have certain disadvantages. To the extent that the student is
assessed on the basis of work done during the course, the independent assessment
of the external examiner may be lost; and a teacher may be less effective if his
relationship to the student throughout his course is also that of examiner. It is
arguable that a student’s chances should not be unduly prejudiced by inferior
work done at an earlier stage, if its inferiority is the result of poor pre-university
preparation. A student who knows that earlier inferior work will be taken into
account may be discouraged and fail to make the progress wliich lie might
otherwise have made.

298. In a number of university courses students are encouraged or required
to undertake dissertations, research or design projects, musical compositions,
and so forth for assessment as part of the degree examination. Such exerci.ses
are liked by students, because they offer the opportunity for original work on
topics which particularly interest them. They are felt to be like ‘the real thing’,
and they may indeed give a better indication of the student’s promise as a
scholar than the normal written examination. This kind of examination is not
easy to conduct. It involves finding a number of projects of equal dilliculty,
or making allowances for variations in the difficulty of unequally diflicult
projects. The choice of projects may be limited by the availability of apparatus.
But there are courses in which much of the final year is devoted to projects,
and the success of these courses shows that these difficulties can be overcome,
at least in some subjects. Fears have also been expressed to us that research
projects and other such exercises are liable to take up too much of a student's
time and distract him from dealing thoroughly with other aspects of hi,s subject,

299. We have perhaps said enough to show that when the respondents to our
questionnaire were expressing approval (or disapproval) of the existing system
of written examinations or of the present frequency of examination, they were
not all expressing it of the same system or of the same examination frequency.
The fact that there is relatively little dissatisfaction with present arrangements
may reflect the natural tendency of those who operate any particular system to
identify themselves with it. But there is in reality, even in this country, more
than one system of university examinations, with differences between them wliich
raise some rather fundamental questions ; while the differences between university
examination systems in this country and those in force in some foreign countries
are much wider. Thus it cannot be assumed without question that any particular
system is incapable of improvement.

300. It is, therefore, satisfactory to find that experimental innovations are being
introduced or proposed in a number of university examinations. This is important
and desirable for two reasons. The first is that in an age in which there -is so
much insistence on equality of opportunity, the influence of examinations and
other tests on the careers of the most gifted members of the rising generation
will certainly not diminish. With so much depending on examinations, it is

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

clearly of great importance that they should measure as well as possible, not
only the knowledge which the candidate has acquired of his subject or subjects,,
but also the qualities and habits of mind for which a degree, and its class, may
be expected to vouch. The second reason is that the form and content of the
examinations for which he prepares cannot fail to have a considerable effect
on the education of the student and on the ideas and habits of work that he
acquires. It is important that this effect should be beneficial and should encourage
good teaching. These are matters which we think would repay continued study
and experiment.

(90678)

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter X

EQUIPMENT FOR TEACHING

301. In this chapter we shall consider briefly, from the point of view of its
effects on teaching methods, the way in which the university teacher is equipped
in the physical sense for the task of undergraduate teaching.

302. Of all forms of equipment the supply of books and periodicals is the most
important. We have received a memorandum of evidence from the Standing
Conference of National and University Libraries, and we included certain
questions as to libraries and the availability of books in our questions to
universities and in the questionnaire answered by a sample of university teachers.
Since then a committee has been appointed jointly by the University Grants
Committee and the Education Departments, under the chairmanship of Dr.
Thomas Parry, to consider the most effective and economical arrangements for
meeting the needs of universities and institutions of higher technological
education for books and periodicals. We shall not, therefore, express views on
how these needs should be met, but it is necessary that we should draw attention
to the ways in which a failure to meet them would react on undergraduate
teaching and learning.

303. In its first report (February, 1921) the University Grants Committee
said that the character and efficiency of a university may be gauged by its
treatment of its central organ, the library; and that they regarded the fullest
provision for library maintenance as the primary and most vital need in the
equipment of a university. We share this view. The need for books for teaching
and research has been growing ever since the invention of printing, and this
growth shows no sign of slackening, despite new techniques and new tools.
Believing as we do that one of the main purposes of a university education is to
teach the student to work on his own and to emancipate himself from dependence
on teachers, we regard it as essential that library facilities for undergraduates,
as well as for research students and staff, should be adequate, and that students
should learn to use them.

304. We asked universities about their arrangements for giving instruction to
new (or other) students on how to make the best use of the library facilities
available to them. It is usual for universities to issue printed booklets or leaflets
to new students on the libraries open to them. In some universities it is left to
directors of studies, tutors, or departments to give oral advice, but it appears
to be more usual to make arrangements on a wider basis for organised talks
to new students. These commonly take the form of conducted tours of the main
library building. The Standing Conference consider such tours inadequate as
leaving no time for instruction in the use of books and periodicals. Guidance
to students on the use of libraries is usually given at the beginning of their first
term, or even before it. We agree that guidance should be given to students about
university work at the outset of their university career, and that it would be
incomplete without some instruction on the use of libraries. If, however, an

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

attempt is made at this stage to give students more than a first introduction to
the use of a library, and to deal with the matter so fully as to make further
instruction unnecessary, there is some risk that students, owing to their general
unfamiliarity with university work, may be unable to relate what they are
told to the problems which they will find when they come to use the library.
A few universities told us that guidance on the use of the library was given at
a later stage, and we would suggest that all universities should consider carefully
at what stage or stages such guidance is best given.

305. We have already referred (Chapter VII, para. 189) to our question to
universities asking whether policy in the matter of lectures had been influenced
by difficulties in ensuring that all students have access to necessary books and
periodicals, and to facilities for reading them. As we have said, few universities
can reply to this question with an unqualified negative, and though not many are
seriously affected, we sense a certain undercurrent of anxiety. The lack of books
and periodicals may make it necessary to cover in lectures matter that might be
left to students’ reading if suitable literature were available. Thus, at one
university with large ordinary classes a shortage of books was given as a reason
for treating in lectures all topics on which questions may be asked in examina-
tions. A lack of books may not simply be a shortage of copies of a suitable
book. It may also mean that no suitable text-books have been published. This
difficulty is most apt to occur in scientific subjects which are developing rapidly.
It is not only lecturing policy that may be affected by a shortage of books.
The content of courses may also be affected. For example, it may not be possible
to include in history courses options requiring the study of source material
which is unobtainable.

306. We asked the sample of university teachers two questions bearing on the
same point. Those who in reply to the question referred to in Chapter VII,
para. 166, said that their students got too much lecturing were asked whether
this was due to a shortage of books. Of the whole sample, 8 per cent thought
students got too much lecturing for this reason. This proportion was lowest
at Oxford and Cambridge (3 per cent) and highest in the civic universities
(11 per cent in the larger and 14 per cent in the smaller). We also asked the
sample whether they thought that if more books were available it would be
desirable to reduce the time given to various forms of teaching. The only form
of teaching which many respondents considered could be reduced in this way
was lectures; 26 per cent of them thought that the time given to lectures could
be so reduced. This proportion was lowest at Oxford and Cambridge (14 per
cent) and London (24 per cent). In other university groups it was between
29 per cent and 32 per cent.

307. On the face of it there is some inconsistency between answers to these
two questions. It is not easy to see why the proportion who thought that students
got too much lecturing owing to a shortage of books should be so much smaller
than the proportion who thought that lecturing time could be reduced by the
availability of more books. A possible but conjectural explanation is that in
answering the second question, but not in answering the first, respondents
took into account the fact that in certain subjects text-books which are both
satisfactory and up-to-date have not been published.

308. However this may be, the minority who see a connection between the
amount of lecturing and the availability of books seems to us to be large enough

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

to suggest that universities might with advantage consider whether there are
any Sc^le improvements in book supplies which could enable cer am
lectures to be discontinued, whether by buying more books or by promoting
the preparation of text books where satisfactory text books do not exist. Fm
the student, attendance at lectures and private study are to some exteiU altei-
natives, and it would be unfortunate if an insufficient supply of books rnade it
necessary to offer lectures which would not otherwise be required If one of
the main purposes of a university education is to teach students to woik on
their own, reading by students must be preferable to attendance at a lecture
unless the lecture is superior in presentation or content to the available literature.
309 The other form of teaching which is affected by the availability of books
is the discussion period, whether tutorial or seminar. This form of teaching is
effective and valuable to the extent that students taking part m it have prepared
themselves for discussion, either by writing an essay or some other Mercise on
the topic to be discussed, or at least by reading it up. The development of this
form of teaching is therefore dependent on library facilities, and we think that
at any rate in some universities an improvement in the supply of books toi
undergraduate reading would probably be necessary before full benefit could
be obtained from an increased use of the discussion period.

310 We asked each university whether any general policy had been laid down
governing the purchase for its libraries of more than one copy each of reference
or standard works of the kind regularly required by students. This problem is
probably less serious at Oxford or Cambridge than elsewhere. The latter informed
us that owing to the multiplicity of libraries— university, faculty, departmental,
and college — there may be available as many as 25 copies of a standard work
regularly required by students, and at Oxford the position is probably similar.
Both universities subsidise book purchases by college libraries. It is significant
that at these universities, where students spend less time at lectures than
elsewhere and where tutorial teaching has been more highly developed, the
proportion of university expenditure which is devoted to libraries is higher than
the national average; at Oxford it is more than double that average. In addition,
the university libraries at Oxford and Cambridge receive many publications free
of charge under the Copyright Acts.

311. Some universities remind us that there are some books which a student
should buy for himself, and the Standing Conference of National and University
Libraries raise the same point. The latter think that students would buy more
books if lecturers put more pressure on them to do so. The full rate of local
authority award includes an allowance of £30 for the purchase of books and
stationery. No effective means have been found for ensuring that this allowance
is spent for that purpose, but some universities have found that to provide
accommodation for a bookshop in a place where students forgather has led
to an increase in book purchases by students. The Standing Conference say
that an unpublished survey conducted at one university showed that only in
one subject were students expected by their departments to spend as much as
£45 on books in three years. Thus some text books which students should buy
for themselves have to be purchased by university libraries. We agree that this
is an unsatisfactory situation, but we doubt whether any practicable increase
in the use of the allowance for book purchase in students’ awards would be
sufficient by itself to bring about the improved supply of books which we think
desirable if the undue dependence of students on oral teaching is to be reduced.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

312. We now turn to accommodation. We asked the sample of university
teachers certain questions to find out how far they were satisfied with their
accommodation. In assessing the answers to these questions it must be remem-
bered that they were given two and a half years ago. Improvements have no
doubt been made since then, though these improvements may soon be cancelled
out we hope temporarily — ^by the increasing number of staff and students.
Each respondent was asked whether he had a private room which was at his
disposal at all times, and if so, how many students he could conveniently teach
in it. The proportion of the sample who had no such private room was 20 per
cent. But with the addition of those in whose rooms no students could be
conveniently taught this proportion is raised to 27 per cent. Among grades of
teachers, assistant lecturers are worst off in this respect: for them alone the
27 per cent becomes 45 per cent. Of the 20 per cent without a private room,
16 per cent (i.e. 3 per cent of the whole sample) do not teach small numbers of
students. The rest have to do this either in a shared room or in one engaged
for the purpose. As between university groups the proportion without a private
room in which they can conveniently teach (27 per cent overall) ranges from
5 per cent at Oxford and Cambridge to 37 per cent in Wales and 39 per cent
in Scotland. Generally speaking, scientists and mathematicians are worse off
than teachers of arts subjects.

313. Each member of the sample was also asked whether teaching in his
department was handicapped by deficiencies in the accommodation for various
forms of teaching. Shortage of lecture rooms was said not to be a handicap
by 57 per cent of the sample. There was most satisfaction at Oxford and
Cambridge (70 per cent), other inter-university differences being doubtfully
significant. The relative frequency of complaints of too few rooms, rooms too
small, and rooms otherwise unsatisfactory was roughly in the ratio 2:1:2.
There was less satisfaction with rooms for teaching by tutorial or seminar. Only
at Oxford and Cambridge were most teachers (75 per cent) satisfied. Elsewhere
the proportion satisfied ranged between 50 and 43 per cent. Complaints that
there were not enough rooms were more numerous than all other complaints
in the ratio 5 : 3. Heads of departments were less satisfied (43 per cent) than
their lecturers. As regards laboratories, drawing offices, &c, the most significant
figures were those for particular subjects. Biologists were least satisfied, 73 per
cent of them complaining of one or more defects. There were also complaints
from 61 per cent of geographers, 49 per cent of chemists, 42 per cent of engineers,
and 36 per cent of physicists.

314. The sample was also asked how much time in a particular fortnight was
spent in repeating any kind of teaching which, but for a shortage of staff or
accommodation, it would have been unnecessary to repeat. To this question
86 per cent of respondents (ranging from 94 per cent at Oxford and Cambridge
to 81 per cent in Wales) answered ‘none’. The proportion who spent 2 hours
or more in this way was 7 per cent, ranging from 1 per cent at Oxford and
Cambridge to 14 per cent in Wales. In giving these figures we should not be
understood to take the view that a repetition of teaching necessitated by shortage
of accommodation is necessarily uneconomic. On the contrary, it may be more
economical to repeat the larger classes than to provide accommodation capacious
enough to avoid repetition, but used fully with relative infrequency.

315. Complaints are often heard of the lack of secretarial and/or technical
assistance, and teachers were asked whether they had adequate assistance of

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

these kinds, and if they had not, what proportion of their working time could
have been saved by adequate help. Slightly under half of the respondents were
dissatisfied with their secretarial assistance, and there were no significant
variations in this proportion between university groups. There was inore
dissatisfaction among teachers of arts subjects than among scientists Lack of
secretarial assistance may affect teaching in various ways. Apart trom the
obvious point that without a secretary correspondence takes more time, there
are also a number of minor administrative duties that can be delegated it
assistance is available. An absence of duplicating facilities may make it necessary
to waste time in lectures dictating or writing on the blackboard material which
would be better circulated to the class in duplicated typescript. Members ot the
sample were asked whether in connection with their lecture courses they would
like to give out more printed or duplicated notes, summaries of lectures, or
guides for further study if secretarial help were available. To this question
37 per cent answered ‘yes’ and 55 per cent ‘no’, the remainder finding it
inapplicable to them. There was no very great variation (32 to 40) between
university and subject groups in the percentage answering ‘yes’. The question
about technical assistance was of course not applicable to all members of the
sample, but of those who answered it the majority-just over three out of every
five— were dissatisfied. Here there was some diflerence between university
groups. A small majority of those who answered the question at Oxford and
Cambridge were satisfied, but in the smaller civic universities and the University
of Wales 70 per cent of those who answered were dissatisfied.

316. Those who were dissatisfied with their technical assistance gave a higher
estimate of the amount of time that might have been saved than those who were
dissatisfied with their secretarial assistance. A third of the former thought that
over one fifth of their time might have been saved, and only one in four put
the saving at under one tenth. Of the latter only one in seven put the saving as
high as over one fifth, and two out of five put it below one tenth.

317. The sample were asked certain questions about their interest in visual
aids (other than the blackboard but including sound film) and sound-recorded
material. Sixty-five per cent of them said that they were interested in using
visual aids in the course of their teaching. The usefulness of visual aids varies
so widely from subject to subject that this overall figure may not be very
significant. Of the subjects for which we have figures, the greatest interest was
shown by geographers (96 per cent) and biologists (92 per cent), followed by
engineers (82 per cent), physicists (81 per cent), and chemists (78 per cent). The
least interest was shown by lawyers (23 per cent) and mathematicians (24 per
cent). Generally speaking, teachers of arts subjects showed less interest than
teachers of science. Less interest was shown at Oxford and Cambridge than
elsewhere, but the differences between university groups are at any rate partly
due to differences in the balance of studies.

318. Those who expressed an interest in visual aids were asked whether the
supply of visual aids was adequate in quahty and quantity. Opinion was equally
divided as to whether the supply was adequate in quality, but a majority (58 per
cent) said that it was inadequate in quantity. Respondents from Scotland,
Wales, and the smaller civic universities tended to be less satisfied, both with
quahty and quantity, and respondents from Oxford and Cambridge to be more
satisfied, than respondents from other universities. As between subjects in which

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

interest is keenest, there was most satisfaction among geographers and least
among biologists and physicists. In all university groups, a majority of the
respondents who professed an interest (66 per cent overall, ranging from
77 pel cent at Oxford and Cambridge down to 57 per cent in Wales) said that
the use of visual aids was not limited by lack of apparatus. Among subjects
in winch interest is keenest, this view was least held by biologists (63 per cent)
but the range of variation between subjects was not very great.

319. Respondents were also asked whether they used sound-recorded material
(other than sound film), and if not whether this was due to inadequate quality
of the material available, its inadequate quantity, lack of apparatus, unsuitability
ot the respondent s subject for this technique, or absence of interest on the part
of the respondent in this technique. Only a small minority of university teachers
(12 per cent) use sound-recorded material, the lowest proportion being at
Oxford and Cambridge (8 per cent) and the largest at the smaller civic universities
(15 per cent) and in the universities of Wales and Scotland (14 per cent).

320. Of the various reasons for non-use, unsuitability of the respondent’s
subject for the use of sound-recorded material was given as a reason for non-use
by 62 per cent of the sample, i.c. by about three-quarters of the non-users.
Absence of interest in this technique on the part of the respondent was the
reason next most frequently adduced, by about one-sixth of non-users.

321. As with visual aids, the usefulness of recorded material varies considerably
from subject to subject, and the overall figures may not be very significant.
The subjects in which one would expect to find the greatest use of recorded
material are languages, and this proves to be the case. The subjects for which
we have particulars include two languages, French and English. In these subjects
the users of recorded material represent respectively 36 and 29 per cent of all
respondents. It is perhaps surprising that more teachers of a modern foreign
language do not use recorded material, and that 43 per cent of teachers of
French, i.e. about 70 per cent of non-users in that subject, gave unsuitability
of the subject for this technique as a reason for non-use. A possible explanation
for this may be that the aspects of language study for which recorded material
is most useful are phonetics and practical exercises, and that the study of a
language at university level includes much more than the study of its sounds.
Those who disclaim interest in recorded material may do so because they are
concerned in teaching branches of the subject for which recorded material is
not indispensable. Replies from universities to questions about the use of new
techniques have made it clear that the use of language laboratories serving a
variety of purposes is spreading rapidly among the universities.

322. The question which we asked universities about unusual or experimental
techniques produced a few references to closed-circuit television, the use of
which may be found valuable, particularly in the teaching of science. One way
in which closed-circuit television could be useful is by enabling simultaneous
classes to hear the same lecture and see the same demonstrations, and this
could enable a single teacher to deal with larger numbers than would otherwise
be possible. We have not, however, considered in detail the potentialities of
closed-circuit television, or other audio-visual aids, in the teaching of science,
as this subject was referred to a separate committee shortly after we had collected
the evidence summarised above. This committee, under the chairmanship of
Dr. Brynmor Jones, is now at work, and will be dealing more exhaustively,

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

with the subject than is possible for us. We have, however, noted he tende^y
to include in many new buildings and adaptations of existing buildings moie
particularly those for departments of science, engineering, and medicine,
built-in facilities for closed-circuit television and kindred aids.

323. There is one form of teaching, sometimes associated with audio-yisiial
aids with which we can conveniently deal at this point. We refer to wh< t i
variously known as ‘programmed learning’, ‘automatic teaching , or "8

machines’. Of these terms the first is to be preferred because the essential thing
is the programme and not the machine. The essence of ‘programmed
is that the student is presented with a series of small items of written informatiom
In the terminology of the subject the complete series is called a programme
and the items are called ‘frames’. To each frame the student luis to make an
immediate response, either by filling in a blank in the text or by answering a
question or questions. Every effort is made, in composing the frame and the
associated question or questions, to make a correct response from the f>turtem
as likely as possible. The student is immediately told whether he has responded
rightly or wrongly before he passes to the next frame. The idea is to ensure that
the student has correctly grasped an item of information before passing to
further items which he will not be able to grasp properly unless he has grasped
the preceding item. In some systems, in which he is offered a multiple-choice
question at the end of the ‘frame’, his choice of a wrong answer wil lead him
to an explanation, so that his difficulty should be cleared up before he returns
to the main stream of the programme.

324 A hunchin g machine has no virtue apart from the programme for which
it is used. It is simply a device for displaying the frames one by one m the correct
sequence and so ensuring that the programme is used in the correct mannen
In some machines, for example, the student is provided with a space m which
to write his answer. Having done so, he presses a button, which causes his
answer to move to a position in which he can see it but can no longer alter it,
while the correct answer is shown at the same time. A teaching machine may be
linked to audio-visual aids. For example, in teaching languages, audio material
containing errors or deviations may be presented, and the student’s participation
may take the form of pressing a button on recognising an error; or the arrival
of a particular frame may cause appropriate visual illustrations to appear on
a screen. But these adjuncts are refinements.

325. There is no reason why a programme should not be made up in the form
of a" text-book, and a growing number of programmes is in fact available in this
form. In some of these text-books the frames succeed one another in logical
sequence; in others the student may be referred to different pages according to
the answer he gives to a multiple-choice question, that is to say, the book is
‘scrambled’ and not intended to be read straight through. Books of the latter
type are not very convenient to use. In either case there is of course no control,
such as a machine gives, over the student’s use of such a programme. For these
and other reasons it is claimed that programmes are more effective when presented
in machines, but experimental proof of this seems to be lacking, and even if it
is true for some types of student it may not be true for all.

326. In essence, programmed learning is no novelty. The essence of the method
is, as we have said, giving a student a small item of information and checking
his understanding of it, e.g., by means of a question, before passing on, and this

100

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

has been the practice of those who have given individual teaching since the
days of Socrates. Socratic dialogue is in fact a kind of programme, and the proof,
in Plato’s Meno, of the Pythagorean theorem as to the square on the hypotenuse
has been adapted without much difficulty as a programme of the type now in
vogue.*

327. Programmed learning conforms not only with long standing practice,
but also with certain principles the importance of which has been demonstrated
by recent research into the psychology of learning. These are that the student
should participate actively in the process of learning, e.g., by making overt
responses; that the student should be immediately informed whether his response
is correct; that reward is more effective as an encouragement to learning than
punishment; and that success in answering correctly has the same effect as a
reward. A further advantage claimed for the use of programmed learning,
whether in a machine or a text-book, is that each student can go at his own pace,
and tliat it thus eliminates the dilemma which the teacher of a class often has to
face, of either boring his quicker students or leaving the slower ones behind.

328. Our attention was drawn to programmed learning by replies to our
questions from two universities (Aberdeen and Sheffield) in which sponsored
research into this subject has been in progress; and we understand that such
research is also in progress or projected in a few other universities. The method
has been enjoying a considerable vogue in the United States, and interest has
since spread in this country.f But the research which is in progress here is
mainly directed towards the use of this method by schools, and so far as we
can ascertain little attention has hitherto been given to its possibilities for
university teaching, except recently at Aberdeen.

329. There are clearly certain limitations on the use of programmed learning
in universities. Its simplest application is to subject matter in which the responses
of the student are either right or wrong, and it is as yet doubtful how far the
method is applicable to subjects in which the student is trained to discuss and
form judgments upon questions of value. University students, however, do
require much factual information to which this method of teaching would
prima facie be applicable.

330. Another limitation arises from the fact that the preparation of an effective
programme is an extremely laborious and exacting exercise, considerably more
time-consuming than the preparation of a lecture course covering similar
ground. It requires from the programmer not only a complete knowledge of
his subject, but also the ability to break it down into a series of small items of
information following each other logically and so expressed as to minimise
the risk of misunderstanding. This requires not only the most rigorous analysis of
the subject matter, but also a patient acceptance of the standpoint that a
student’s mistake is basically the teacher’s fault.

331. A completed programme requires to be ‘evaluated’ by being tried out on
students to ensure that all sources of misunderstanding have as far as possible
been eliminated, and this may involve extensive revision. It has been estimated
that the ratio of programme-construction-and-evaluation time to the student’s

* American Psychologist; Vol. 17, No. 11, November 1962. Programmed Learning and the
Socratic Dialogue: Isa S. Cohen.

t See, for example, The Times Educational Supplement for 19th April, 1963, a section of
which i.s devoted to articles on this subject.

101

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

final study-time may be of the order of 100 to one. Thus programmes rf satis-
factory standard will be expensive of time and therefore of money and will not
be economical unless they can be used by very large numbers of students.

332. Perhaps the most promising field for experiments in programmed learning
at tins stage would be in its application to prelimmaij and introductory

in subject matter of a factual kind. We understand that programmes ot this
kind have been employed with very large first-year science classes at Abudeen
University. Programmes might also be used for teaching subjects ol which
students require some knowledge as an aid to the study of anothei subject,
e.g., Russian for scientists, or statistics as an aid to the study ot econonnes or
genetics. It has also been suggested that they might be useful for tlie .student
who is joining a class in which the teaching assumes the attainment ol a higher
standard than he has himself reached.

333. The usefulness of programmed learning in university teaching will require
to be tested by trial and error. This means that it will have to he npplied
experimentally to particular needs in particular subjects, and such testing will
only be practicable as programmes become available of a kind which would be
suitable for university students. This may not happen if the matter is left to
the enterprise of individuals or single departments. The preparation and
evaluation of a programme is, as we have said, a most exacting and time-
consuming process. It may be said that, to anyone devoted to teaching, an
exercise of this kind cannot fail to be rewarding, but the organi.sation ol
universities is such that the reward is more likely to be moral than matei ivil unless
special steps are taken. Again, it may be said that the use of piogiammcd
learning should lead to some staff economy, but this may not be realised in
practice unless it is organised on a large scale. The time consumed by the
preparation and testing of a programme is so great that a programme for the
needs of a single department would probably be uneconomic. Few departments
would be in a position to release members of their staff from current teaching
for so speculative a venture unless substitutes could be provided.

334. Our view of programmed learning is thus that it appears to be sound in
principle, and prima facie applicable to some forms of university teaching, but
that if its possibilities for any particular subject or subjects arc to bo explored
some form of inter-university co-operation, with ad-hoc finance, will probably
be required.

102

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter XI

UNIVERSITY TEACHING AS A MATTER
FOR TRAINING AND STUDY

335. In our questions to universities, and in the questionnaire sent to a sample
of university teachers, we asked about the extent to which university teachers
receive, and should receive, training or instruction in how to teach. We also
asked each university whether any study of teaching methods had been made
in the university, and whether any unusual or experimental methods of teaching
weie in opeiation or under discussion which might be of interest to us.

336. Of the sample of university teachers, 10 per cent said that they had
completed courses of training as teachers, half of them in university Departments
of Education. The lowest proportion so trained (4 per cent) was at Oxford and
Cambridge. There was relatively little variation between other university groups,
but more variation between subjects. Economists and lawyers have rarely received
such training, but it is relatively common (over 20 per cent) for geographers
and teachers of English and French to have done so. Of those who have received
such training, two-tliirds said that it had been a definite advantage to them as
university teachers. Respondents were also asked whether they had had other
training, for example, in the Services, in methods of instruction. Twenty per cent
of respondents had had such training, and this proportion was as high at Oxford
and Cambridge as elsewhere.

337. A further question asked whether the respondent had ever had any
instruction or guidance on the teaching of university students, and this question
was answered in the affirmative by 17 per cent (10 per cent at Oxford and
Cambridge). Between subjects the range of variation was from 11 per cent
among lawyers to 23 per cent among engineers and 24 per cent among
mathematicians. Roughly three-quarters of those who answered ‘yes’ to the
question had answered ‘no’ to the previous question on training in methods of
instruction.

338. Finally, respondents were asked whether they had ever checked on the
efficiency of their lecturing technique, e.g. by recording a lecture, inviting
criticism, and so on. To this question 67 per cent answered ‘yes’. Among university
groups the lowest proportion, 62 per cent, was at Oxford and Cambridge, with
little variation in other universities, where the range was from 67 to 69 per cent.
Among subjects only mathematicians (49 per cent) and lawyers (57 per cent) were
appreciably below average. The highest proportion was among biologists, with
77 per cent. Heads of departments were over average with 74 per cent, and
assistant lecturers under average with 57 per cent.

339. Universities were asked whether any training or instruction in teacliing
is given to members of staff, and the answers showed that any such instruction
is usually limited to informal advice and guidance, given on a departmental
level. Such advice is more easily given in scientific subjects, where the prospective

103

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

university teacher will often demonstrate under supervision as a graduate
student and where the practice of holding colloquia enables senior colleagiKS
to judge the performance of their juniors without attending lectures given by
the latter to undergraduates.

340 So far as we know Nottingham is the only university at which centrally
organised courses of instruction in university teaching are now being provided.
Here the Department of Education has provided such courses on three occasions
for junior members of staff who wish for such instruction and who have not
more than two years’ experience of university teaching. The Department has
done so only on request, and the importance of waiting to be asked was
emphasised to us. The third course was in the session 1962-63. This course
was ta Ven by 22 junior teachers, and it is believed that some 30-40 per cent
of those eligible at the time to take part in these courses have done so. The
course occupied an hour a week for a little more than a term, with some extra
periods towards the end. It began with a general introductory lecture and a
lecture on lecturing attended by all. The class then divided between arts and
science, and later into smaller groups, with individual teaching in the last
stages. A summer school on effective teaching for university teachers of
Engineering was held at the Manchester College of Science and Technology
during a week of the long vacation of 1963. It was open to, and attended by,
members of other universities. We were glad to learn that it is hoped to repeat
this experiment.

341. We asked each university whether there had been any discussion, and
if so, with what result, of the desirability of giving members of staff any training
or instruction in teaching. The replies showed that, while there has been a
good deal of discussion, it has rarely resulted in action, and any readers of these
replies could only conclude that the weight of university opinion was decidedly
in favour of leaving this matter to be dealt with informally at a departmental
level. The sample of university teachers, however, showed a majority in favour
of the view that ‘newly-appointed university teachers should receive some form
of organised instruction or guidance on how to teach’. Overall, 58 per cent of
respondents took this view. Among university groups it was least current at
Oxford and Cambridge (48 per cent) and most in Scotland (65 per cent). The
view was not less prevalent among heads of departments than among other
members of staff. Among subjects, the view was least prevalent among teachers
of English and History (44 per cent) and most among Engineers (68 per cent).

342. We discussed with most of the university delegations who came to see us
the question what training a university teacher should receive. We are clear
that any proposal to make a full-time course of training lasting for, say, a year
a necessary qualification for a university appointment would receive no support
at all. Any arrangements which were obligatory, and which occupied much of
the time of prospective or newly-appointed university teachers, might act as a
serious deterrent to the recruitment by the universities of men and women whose
primary interest was in scholarship and research. On the other hand, the present
arrangements, if such they can be called, seem to us to be more haphazard
than is desirable, and result in much university teaching being less effective than
it should be.

343. The question what training should be given can most usefully be con-
sidered in relation to the various forms of teaching. Demonstrating in laboratory
subjects is learnt ‘on the job’. The research student commonly gives some of

104

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

his time to demonstrating. He thus serves an apprenticeship in this form of
teaching while working for his higher degree, and this apprenticeship commonly
continues after his first appointment as a university teacher, since we know
that the majority of practical classes in laboratory subjects are attended by
more than one teacher. We do not think that any further arrangements for
training in demonstrating are needed. Rather similar considerations apply to
seminars. The giving of a tutorial, at which a single teacher returns written
work to a single student or a very small number of students and discusses it
with him or them, is undoubtedly a difficult art, and one of which a young
university teacher may have had little or no experience as a student if he obtained
his degree at a university at which this form of teaching was not then in operation.
There is, we think, much help which an experienced practitioner of tutorial
teaching could give to a novice, and which would make him effective far sooner
than if he were left to learn from his own mistakes.

344. This leaves the lecture, and here again the case for some training seems
to us to be particularly strong. When every allowance is made for the fact that
students are not always the best judges of a lecture, there is more complaint
from students about lectures than there would be if the standard of lecturing
were generally satisfactory. In some cases we believe that the importance of
thorough preparation is not always realised, but even where it is there are two
ways in which a lecture may fail. It may fail from faults of construction and
arrangement, a common fault of this type being the attempt to cover too much
ground in a single lecture, or it may fail from faults of presentation and delivery.
A lecture, particularly to a large class, is in some ways analogous to a stage
performance. No-one would expect to succeed on the professional stage without
training. A nearer analogy may be the broadcast talk. Some of us have had
experience of giving such talks, and have received valuable assistance from the
B.B.C. producers who have rehearsed us beforehand. Some of our witnesses
have expressed the fear that training in lecturing might inhibit the natural
lecturer, and produce a dull uniformity, but we do not see why it should do so.
Training for the stage does not have this effect. Far from suppressing the actor’s
personality, it helps him to put it across. Some lecturers, and no doubt some
actors, are successful despite the fact they they commit many faults that a
teacher of the art would censure, and we would agree that if a lecturer has an
interesting and sympathetic personality, and enthusiasm for his subject, these
gifts will more than atone for faults which others could not afford to commit.
This fact, however, is no sufficient reason for allowing the less gifted lecturer
to be less effective than he might be if his faults were corrected before they have
hardened into habits.

345. As will have been seen from para. 338 a substantial proportion of
university teachers, which is highest among the most junior (assistant lecturers,
43 per cent) have never checked the efficiency of their teaching technique. We
think it would be desirable that all newly-appointed members of staff whose
duties are to include lecturing to undergraduates, and who are without previous
experience of such lecturing, should undergo some test as a matter of course.
We were usually told, when we discussed these matters with universities, that
a head of department soon hears, e.g. from student comment, if a new lecturer
is failing in some way, and can then take action. The disadvantage of leaving
action to be taken until after there has been some complaint is that the receipt

105

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

of any guidance or advice is then associated in the mind of the recipient with
a sense of failure. A young lecturer whose lectures have been found to be
unsatisfactory may find it more difficult to profit by advice than if his short-
comings had been corrected at an earlier stage.

346. There are various ways in which a lecture can be submitted to more
informed criticism than that of the undergraduate class for which it is intended.
The most obvious way is for the lecture to be attended by a senior colleague,
and although it is not usual for university teachers to attend each others
undergraduate lectures, heads of departments do this^ at a few_ universities.
This may not always be advisable. A young lecturer in these circumstances
might be unable to avoid lecturing to his professor as well as to his class, and
with two so different audiences might well fall between two stools. One possible
way of obviating the ill effects of the physical presence of a senior colleague
would be for the young lecturer to record his lecture and have it played back
to him or to a senior colleague. Recordings are apt to be unflattering and foi
this reason the young lecturer should have expert help in recording any lecture
of his for criticism by a senior colleague.

347. Another and perhaps a better way of enabling a senior critic to hear a
lecture without being present in the lecture room would be by the use of
closed-circuit television, and we think that this should be given a trial as the
apparatus becomes available. It would then be possible for the critic to observe
and listen to the lecture without being physically present. We do not of course
suggest that a lecture should be monitored in this way without the knowledge
of the lecturer. We believe, however, that there is experience of watching other
behaviour in this way which suggests that if the observer can watch without
being seen, the distorting effects of his presence on the behaviour observed arc
avoided even when the subject knows that he is under observation. No doubt
his absorption in his task causes him to forget that he is being observed when
he is not constantly reminded of it by seeing the observer before him.

348. We have heard of institutions in America where students are prepared to
provide lecturers, in confidence, with critical assessments of their lectures, and
this is no doubt to be preferred to the public criticism of lectures in under-
graduate magazines which was recently a source of trouble here. But apart
from the objections to public criticism, students are not always the be.st Judges
of a lecture. A more satisfactory arrangement would be for the lecture to be
attended by a person skilled in lecturing to undergraduates whose regular
business it was to attend such lectures and give advice to lecturers. Experiments
of this kind have been made, and we should like to see them extended.

349. It has been represented to us in evidence that instruction in teaching
methods could he profitably given only by persons who were well versed in the
particular subject-matter concerned, and from this it was argued that such
instruction could only be given to a teacher of any subject by the professor in
that subject. We do not agree with this, at any rate insofar as lecturing is
concerned. Certainly the B.B.C. producers whom some of us have found so
helpful would never claim to be as well-versed as those whose talks they were
producing in the subject-matter of the talks. No doubt a person ignorant of,
say, physics would not be competent to criticise the content of a lecture on the
subject. But he need not know as much as the professor or the lecturer in order

106

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

to give advice on the effective organisation of a subject for a lecture to under-
graduates, and on its effective presentation, as well as on such matters as pace,
diction, voice-production, distracting mannerisms, the management of the
blackboard, etc.

350, The question of providing training or instruction in university teaching
leads naturally to consideration of the study of university teaching methods.
We asked each university whether any study of methods of university teaching
had been made in the university, the results of which could be made available to
us. The University of Birmingham sent us a number of tables summarising the
results of a statistical survey undertaken in the autumn term of 1961, and the
University of Edinburgh sent us reports of a staff/student inquiry into tutorial
methods and class examinations (1955) and of a working party on the transition
from school to university. The University of Keele, who have been continually
occupied with the problems involved in the ‘foundation year’ of their course,
have now been enabled by the Nuffield Foundation to appoint a Research
Fellow. At the time when we took evidence from universities no other full-time
appointments had been made for the purpose of studying university teaching,
but appointments for this purpose have since been made by the Universities
of Essex, Lancaster, and Manchester, and research projects are now taking
shape. At the last named university a univei'sity education research project is
being financed by the University Grants Committee, and the work now in
progress includes studies of the teaching of statistics and of modern languages
with special reference to new methods and media. We are indebted to Dr. F. G.
Healey, who is in charge of this work, for useful information on work planned
and in progress in various universities. The only controlled experiments in the
efficiency of particular methods of university teaching of which the results have
come to our notice are those by Professor Weatherall (Pharmacology, London
Hospital Medical College) and certain of his colleagues, and by Professor
Cottrell (Chemistry, University of Edinburgh). Professor Weatherall’s papers
on the relative efficiency of certain teaching methods have been published.’"
We comment briefly above (para. 202) on Professor Cottrell’s study. We under-
stand that the University of Bristol is proposing to undertake research into the
role of laboratory work in university teaching, that the Institute of Education
in the University of London is planning certain work relating to methods of
teaching in higher education, and that the Department of Mechanical Engin-
eering in the University of Birmingham is carrying out certain experiments in
teaching methods. In addition to studies relating specifically to teaching methods,,
a number of other studies have been made or are in progress, notably by the
Research Unit on Student Problems, University of London, on matters which
have a bearing on university teaching, such as methods of selection, methods of
testing intelligence or aptitude, and factors affecting the success or failure of
students, including a project on this last subject financed by the University
Grants Committee at the University of Birmingham. The University of Leeds
has a programme in a number of fields, some relevant to our terms of reference
and some outside them.

351 . Our question to universities, asking whether any unusual or experimental
methods of teaching were in operation or under discussion, necessarily left each
university to decide whether any particular method was to be regarded as

* The Lancet, 31st August, 1957, pages 402-407, and 14th March, 1959, pages 568-571;
the British Medical Journal, 1st October, 1960, vol. ii, pages 1007-1011.

107

(90678)

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

unusual or experimental, and it was clear from the answers that the question
was differently interpreted in different places. One university said that they did
not include the use of records, films, tape-recorders, or small-scale research
problems, as they did not consider these methods unusual, and the same view
may have been taken elsewhere, but other universities told us about just these
things. Thus, it is not to be assumed that those institutions which gave a wholly
or mainly negative answer are more conservative in their teaching methods than
others which gave fuller or more positive answers; they may simply have had
a higher standard of what was to be regarded as unusual. In these circumstances
we can only state our general impressions.

352. Apart from teaching aids with which we have dealt in an earlier chapter,
the unusual or experimental methods most usually reported were departures
from accepted practice in such matters as the organisation of teaching, (e.g. the
presence of more than one teacher in discussion groups, or reading parties away
from the university in term-time), the introduction of research or design projects
into undergraduate courses, or the adoption of case methods in the teaching of
law and other subjects in the field of social science.

353. For the most part these experiments have been undertaken on a depart-
mental basis. This is the natural consequence of the autonomy in regard to their
teaching methods enjoyed by most departments in most universities. A number
■of university departments, however, have initiated developments of teaching
method and of the use of teaching aids which would be applicable not only to
•departments in other universities concerned with the same subject, but also
to wider fields of study than that with which the originating departments are
-concerned. There is some risk that, in this as in some other matters, departmental
boundaries may be obstacles to the free flow of ideas. The weakness of the
present situation is that, with no inter-university organisation concerned with
the study of methods of teaching undergraduates, a change of method which
appears to promise well in one university department may not be taken up
-elsewhere; indeed, knowledge of the change and its results may be confined to
the university in which it has been made, or may spread only slowly through
fortuitous contacts.

.354. It has been remarked that university teachers, who devote so much of
their time to inquiry and experiment, and who are never backward, in their
own subjects, in challenging accepted views for which evidence is lacking, seem
nevertheless in their teaching to be often content with a somewhat uncritical
acceptance of traditional methods. The criticism is less deserved that it was.
There is increasing interest in teaching in the universities, and more thought is
given to ways of improving it than is generally recognised. We have read with
great interest the report of the committee on teaching set up by the General
Board of Cambridge University;* and we have noted that teaching methods
are included in the terms of reference given by Oxford University to the
committee which it has appointed under the chairmanship of the Provost of
Worcester College. But there are certainly factors in university life which are
unfavourable to the study of teaching methods. A person who adopts the career
-of university teacher does not do so in most cases because his main object is
to teach. A more usual motive is the desire to pursue research in a subject which
has engaged his interest as a student, teaching being regarded as a duty incidental
to a life of scholarship. And, whatever the motive which first led him to adopt

* Cambridge University Reporter, 1st May, 1964.

108

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

an academic career, he soon realises that it is on his achievement as a scholar
rather than as a teacher that his advancement in his profession will depend. The
reason for this may be simply that in considering candidates for appointment it
is easier to obtain an objective assessment of a man as a scholar than as a
teacher, but whatever the reason there is certainly little to tempt anyone to give
to a study of teaching methods time which both inclination and self-interest
would lead him to devote to his own subject. Nor, if a man should feel drawn
to study methods of teaching, would it be easy for him to do so as an individual.
Useful experimentation in this field would probably in most cases require the
co-operation of a team. We have already referred (Chapter X, para. 333) to the
concerted effort which would be required before any authoritative assessment
could be made of the part which programmed learning might play in the
teaching of any subject. Other matters on which inquiry and experiment are
needed include the application to university teaching of modern developments
in means of communication such as films, recorded sound, and television, and
for this expensive apparatus is often necessary. In fields of study in which
team-work and expensive apparatus are needed for research, research follows
the money, and funds have seldom been available for research into university
teaching.

355. The position in America is quite different. A national temperament ever
friendly to innovations has recently been stirred to a mood of self-criticism in
educational matters by Russian scientific achievements, and the pressure of
demand for higher education has also acted as a stimulus towards experiment,

356. In 1951 the Ford Foundation established a Fund for the Advancement of
Education, and had, by a date in 1963, granted to it no less than $64,000,000
(£23,000,000) for its work. The principal activity of the Fund has been the
support of experimental programmes which hold promise of advancing education
in American schools and colleges. Its work has extended into the field of
university education. It has included the setting up of a committee on the
Utilisation of College Teaching Resources with power to finance experiments.
As a result of the experiments thus promoted this committee found that in
America more students are capable of working independently of classroom
instruction than have been given an opportunity of working in this way, with
results as good as or better than under present methods of instruction, but that
students require to be carefully prepared for independent study to get the fullest
benefit from it. With such preparation average and slow students can do well.
They also found that in America the quality of the teacher has more effect on
student learning than methods of teaching or size of class, from which it followed
that television should be more used (not only for science teaching) in order that
the best teachers may influence more students. They say that American students
learn as much in large classes as in small, the loss of personal contact being
made up for by the judicious use of class groups of widely varying size, and by
the greater use of capable assistants. They advocate a greater use of modern
technology and of part-time teachers in order to make up for staff shortages.*

357. Under a scheme called the ‘released time programme’ grants were made
towards the salaries of members of staff released to spend full time giving
courses by television to regularly-enrolled students. Twenty-six such courses
were given under this scheme, more than half of them in the humanities and

* Better Utilisation of College Teaching Resources. The Fund for the Advancement of
Education, 1959.

109

( 90678 )

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

social science, with an average enrolment of 460. For seven the enrolment was
over 1,400 with a maximum of 2,600. No significant difference was found m the
achievement of students taking televised courses and that of matched control
groups taught conventionally by the same teacher. The report on this scheme
discusses the advantages and disadvantages of teaching by television, but
concludes that it is too early for final judgment.*

358. Another Committee was set up by the Fund to review experiments aitried
at improving graduate education. This committee was unanimous in thinking
that graduate schools over-concentrated on research and failed to provide
effective training in teaching. In the view of this committee ‘close arialysis
always reveals the artificiality of the alleged conflict between teaching arid
“research” ’f and they deplore the pressure on the young Ph.D. for early
publication. ‘To the college teacher by profession even the most exacting
research is primarily a way of preserving the vitality of his teaching and tlie
intensity of his intellectual life’.

359. An interesting alternative to placing responsibility for training in teaching
on the graduate school, and one which might be more acceptable in this country,
is a scheme for training young college and university teachers on the job. The
same Committee on Graduate Schools made grants to 24 institutions, including
five universities, for experimental internship programmes, based on the belief
that ‘the new faculty member is ready for help if he has not been led to believe
that willingness to accept help is a confession of incompetence .j. Undei these
schemes each new teacher was given a reduced teaching load, allowing him time
to attend seminars on teaching problems and to observe the teaching of others.
His own teaching was also under observation, and he was allotted to a ‘sponsor’,
i.e. a senior colleague who acted as a kind of tutor.

360. Other experiments financed by the Fund have been aimed at eliminating
undue repetition at college of work done at school and at increasing the number
of weeks in the year during which college or university buildings and plant are
used for the education of students without increasing the strain on staff, who
teach in rotation and are allowed periods free of teaching duties which they
can devote to research. The institutions concerned ‘desire to run the plant
year-round, not the faculty’.§

361. In giving these few examples of the work done in America by the Fund
for the Advancement of Education we do not wish to suggest-that conclusions
reached as a result of experiments in that country are necessarily applicable in
the somewhat different conditions prevailing here. It is not to the particular
conclusions, suggestive though some of them are, so much as to the method of
attack on teaching problems that we wish to direct attention. Tlie problem
which faces universities and colleges in America does not differ essentially from
that with which our own universities are faced. It is that of dealing with a
demand for higher education which has increased, and will continue to increase,
more rapidly than the resources likely to be available to meet it with traditional
methods.

* Televised College Courses. The Fund for the Advancement of Education, 1962.
t The quotations in this paragraph are from ‘The Graduate School Today and Tomorrow’.
The Fund for the Advancement of Education, December 1955.

t Tomorrow’s Professors: A Report of the College Faculty Internship Program. Fund for
the Advancement of Education, 1959.

§ The Year-Found Campus Catches On. The Fund for the Advancement of Education. 1961.

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

362. In this country the need for research in university teaching, for example
on the application of the new methods of communication made available by
modern technology, has been present for some time, apart from the problems
created by increased numbers. The expansion proposed by the Committee on
Higher Education makes this need still more pressing. It is our belief that if this
expansion is to be carried out, and the standard of university teaching is to be
maintained during the expansion, with no more than legitimate claims on
national revenue and on the limited pool of ability, ways will have to be found
of making better use both of university buildings and plant and of the time of
university teachers. The Committee on Higher Education say that the expansion
which they recommend will not in the long run claim an increasing share of
the country’s graduates.* But it will in the short run. They estimate that the
proportion of home graduates of three years earlier who will have to be recruited
as teachers in full-time education will have to be raised from 13-7 per cent in
the four years 1959-60 to 1962-63 to 18-4 per cent in the four years 1963-64
to 1966-67. This is an increase of over one-third. They also estimate that if the
proportion of home graduates recruited as university teachers remained constant
the student-staff ratio would rise from 7-5 in 1962-63 to 8-8 in 1966-67 and
would not fall below 7-5 until 1971-72.t

363. The research which we consider necessary is operational research. Surveys
such as those on which we have been engaged have served their purpose. The
need is now for experiment. A policy of well-directed experiment in university
teaching would in our view best be organised on an inter-university basis. If
this view is accepted, the precise form of organisation required would need
further consideration, but it seems to us that there are three main requirements.
The first is a body to promote and steer a concerted programme of experiment.
Such a body might be a standing committee composed of members whose
calibre and interest in teaching would inspire confidence in the universities,
with a full-time secretary working under their direction. A second main require-
ment is money to meet additional costs incurred by universities making experi-
ments. Funds for this purpose could be administered by the body we propose,
who would be able to make or recommend grants for experiments in the methods
and organisation of university teaching put forward by universities, and by
faculties and departments of universities. A third main requirement is that the
results of experiments should be published in such a way as to reach all those for
whose teaching the results might be significant. In addition to publication in
appropriate journals, the body which we propose to promote experiments
would, as a natural extension of this function, act as a centre from which
universities considering experiments could obtain information about the results
of earlier experiments ; and it might, as it gained experience, be able to indicate
directions in which further experiment was needed, and to help plan experiments.
It might also promote and finance summer schools at which teachers in some
particular field of study could meet colleagues from other universities for a
discussion of teaching methods; and if at the same time the opportunity were
taken to discuss the content of undergraduate courses, we should think this an
entirely desirable extension of the scope of discussion, since it is difficult to
consider teaching methods in isolation from the content of teaching. A further
service which such an inter-university organisation might offer would be advisers

* Cmnd. 2154, Chapter XII, particularly para. 535 and Table 47.

t Ibid, Appendix Three, Annex Y.

Ill

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

in lecturing techniques who could visit a university if so requested and assist
members of staff who felt the need of their advice. It would, however, be a
mistake to attempt to define too closely at the outset the scope and functions
of such an organisation; its growth would depend on the demand foi its sei vices.

112

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Chapter XII
SUMMARY

364. In our study of the inethods by which undergraduates are taught we
begin with some general considerations. We see some dangers to the quality of
undergraduate education in the increasing volume and complexity of knowledge.
If this is not to result in the overloading of degree courses, their nature and
content need to be kept under review. Relief may also be obtained through the
institution of postgraduate courses, but it is important that the first-degree
course should give a preparation for professional life which does not depend
for its value on the addition of a postgraduate course. Undergraduate teaching
tends to be increasingly divided among specialist teachers, and this may lead
to the acquisition of knowledge becoming overemphasized at the expense of
what we regard as the main purpose of the first-degree course. That should be
to train the student to think for himself and work on his own.

365. We have then to consider whether the way in which the student spends
his time is best fitted to give him not only knowledge but also that independence
of mind which we consider so important. The student’s time is divided, roughly
in the proportions 5 : 3, between term and vacation. The vacations should be
of value in giving him practice in working on his own. In our interim report,
published in 1963, we summarised the information we had obtained about the
use made by students of the long vacation of 1961, which did not seem to us
to be satisfactory. We discussed the difficulties, financial and other, which
students found in using the vacation to best advantage, and made a number of
suggestions which we believe are being followed up.

366. In the present report the general considerations summarised in paras. 26-33
are followed (Chapter II) by a brief account of the structure of degree courses,
drawing attention to certain features which influence the teaching and super-
vision of students. One of these features is the prestige of specialised honours
courses and the loss of esteem, particularly in England, of more generalised
courses. Contributing factors to this loss of esteem have been the division of
responsibility between academic departments for students following general
courses, and the practice of some universities of admitting students direct to
honours courses and later relegating to general courses honours students of
marginal performance.

367. The alternative, universal in Scotland and Wales, of admitting students
only to general courses and promoting some to specialised work for honours
at a later stage, involves problems of its own. The structure of the ordinary
degree course in Scotland necessarily involves very large classes, and this feature
accounts for a number of differences between university teaching in Scotland
and elsewhere.

368. We discuss the experience of universities in allowing students to change
subjects, and suggest that, with the change recently made in the regulations
governing university awards, more flexibility in permitting changes of subject
might be possible.

113

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

In some degree courses the extent of a student’s success in sessional
^ rainations held in June determines what work he will do in the next session.
ThTmay be unknown to him when he leaves for the long vacation, and may
'udice his use of it. Moreover, our inquiries into students’ use of the vacations
that students expecting to sit examinations or undergo other tests in
u autumn are more diligent in the long vacation than other students. For
reasons there would be advantage to teaching in making the academic year
from January to December. Such a change has also been advocatecl on
grounds. It would involve complex administrative issues which are being
examined. We think that this problem in all its aspects should be
considered as a whole.

,-if] In most universities the basic units of organisation are the departments,
^ ti'ch enjoy a large measure of independence. This form of organisation involves
"'“'in problems, some arising from the effect of size on honours teaching,
% ers when the department is responsible for much ‘service’ teaching for other
j nrtments (e.g. mathematics for engineers), others again when the range of a
^ ree course extends over the fields of two or more departments in such a way
ii t no one department is mainly responsible for it. We discuss these problems
, f;i,apter III. Perhaps the most serious is the difficulty of providing adequate
ervision for the student who belongs wholly to no department and thus may
f I himself to he a ‘second-class citizen’. If more students arc to take broader
irses, as recommended by the Committee on Higher Education, these
oblcuis will become increasingly important. We think that in some universities
incompatibility between full departmental autonomy and the satisfactory
conduct of multi-subject courses requires further study.

17 I The transition from school to university requires the student to make a
aoid adjustment in his way of life and in his approach to learning, und bis
Ljt year at the university is therefore a critical period for him. In Chapter IV
„„ give some account ofthe extent to which students are prepared for this change
before and at the beginning of their university life, and during their first year
{the university. A sample of new students was asked in their first term whether
advice on how to be a university student was necessary for them, and if so,
Ijjther they got it. Two thirds of the sample answered ‘yes’ to the first question,
and 28 answered ‘yes’ (19 per cent of the whole sample)

answered ‘no’ to the second.

372 First-year students get rather more teaching than others, but the teaching
[],ey receive tends to be in larger groups, and fewer of them than of other
students had spoken informally to any member of staff in the week surveyed.
y\/e think it important that every first-year student should have opportunities,
which he does not have to make for himself, to discuss his academic problems
with a member of staff who is not a stranger to him. Both for this reason, and
because the first year is the time when the student should be making the break-
through from the mentality of the schoolboy to that of the university student,
we think the discussion period particularly important for first-year students.

373 In Chapter V some account is given of the way in which students spend
their time in term. The median weekly hours of arts students are 10 under
instruction and 25 in private study ; those of students of pure and applied science
are respectively 17 and 20 under instruction, and 20 and 19 in private study.
Lectures, 7 hours, and discussion periods, over 2 hours, account for most of
the teaching received by arts students. The longer hours spent under instruction

114

)°rinted image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

by science students are mainly due to practical classes (pure science 8 hours,
applied science 7 hours), but they also receive more teaching by lecture,
particularly in applied science, and less in discussion periods. Weekly hours
of insti uction are shorter at Oxford and Cambridge than elsewhere by two hours,
and longer in Scotland by about the same amount.

p4. We asked universities whether they limited hours under instruction. This
IS a problem in multi-subject courses. Where limits are in operation, the most
usual limits are 24—25 for laboratory subjects and 12 hours for other subjects.
But 30 per cent of arts students spend more than 12 hours under instruction,
and 25 hours or more are so spent by 12 and 22 per cent of students of pure and
applied science respectively.

375. In Chapter VI we summarise the evidence we have received as to student
opinion about methods of teaching. This evidence came partly from memoranda
by student organisations and partly from statistical survey.s. Student opinion
is critical both of the lecture as a method of teaching, on the grounds that it is
a ‘one-way’ process, and also of the quality of some lectures. The value of some
types of lecture is recognised, but the student organisations think that too much
emphasis is placed on lectures. The statistical evidence, however, suggests that
the majority of individual students do not wish for a change in the time given
to lectures. Of those who wish for a change, most want fewer, but there is an
appreciable minority who want more. All the evidence is at one in showing a
strong student demand for more teaching by tutorial and seminar. There is
relatively little comment on other methods of teaching. The statistical evidence
shows a balance of opinion in favour of less time in practical classes, except in
Scotland, and of more time in other classsos and in field work.

376. Lectures and discussion periods are considered in Cliapter VII. Two
university tcacliers out of tliree are satislied with the amount of lecturing. Of
the others most think that tliere is too much, but the overwhelming weiglit of
university opinion is that lectures iiave an essential function, particularly for
opening up a subject for students who are not in a position to do it for themselves
by unassisted reading, and also for giving more detailed information where
suitable text-books are lacking. Lectures have certain advantages over discussion
periods in that a continuous exposition, free from interruptions, can be better
prepared and more profound than teaching in a discussion period, can cover
more ground, and can enable an inspiring teacher to influence more students.

377. The median size of lecture audiences is 19, but it is higher in Scotland (32)
than clsevyiiere. As between feoulties it is liighest in pure science (33) and lowest
in humanities (15). Three lectures out of 10 arc given to audiences of under 10,
but under 7 per cent of all student hours spent in lectures were spent in lectures
given to audiences as small as this. We give reasons for not accepting without
qualification the view of the Committee on Higher Education that there is little
virtue in formal lectures delivered to small audiences.

378. The section on lectures ends with a discussion of certain specific points,
such as the circulation of written material at lectures and the effects on lecturing
policy of book shortages. We take the view that students should be clearly
informed whether their attendance at a particular series of lectures is obligatory.

379; The section on the discussion period first considers tlie points of
similarity and difference between seminars and tutorials. The former tend to be
subject-centred, and the latter to be student-centred, but both commonly begin

115

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

with the presentation of a paper or essay on a set topic followed by

It is widely held that numbers at a tutorial should not exceed four, and many

prefer individual teaching. For seminars the size of group

between six and twelve, but many seminars are larger. At Oxford and Cambndge

tutorials are smaller than elsewhere, but arts students at those universities do

not spend more time in discussion periods attended by nine or fewer students

than arts students elsewhere. In most sciences, on the other hand, tutoiial

teaching is relatively little used outside Oxford and Canibiidge.

380 We give some account of the traditional system at Oxford as representing
one end of the spectrum. There nine out often tutorials are given to one or
two students, and responsibility for organising the student’s work and giving
some teaching is normally concentrated in one tutor. These features have both
advantages and disadvantages which we discuss.

381 We also discuss the criticism of the one-to-one tutorial by the Committee
on Higher Education. The criticism that it is too exacting seems to us mis-
conceived. Moreover, we doubt whether a teaching system which is based on
small tutorials is necessarily expensive.

382. If students are to get full benefit from a discussion period it is essential
that they should first do some work on the topic for discussion. This is best
ensured by setting written work to be done. Four students out of five prepare
written work for staff criticism at least fortnightly. Some written work is handed
back with written comment and not discussed, but three students out of four
(more in arts, fewer in applied science; more at Oxford and Cambridge, fewer
in Scotland) prepare written work for criticism at least once a term, and have
that work discussed in discussion periods.

383. Chapter 'VII ends with a section on the respective uses of lectures and
discussion periods. The student requires a framework for his course and
guidance on private study. This can be given either by lectures or by tutorials,
but at nearly all universities it is done by the former. Apart from framework
lectures, lectures may be needed to give students detailed facts and points of
view which they will not find, or only with difficulty, in the literature. Lectures
also give the inspiring teacher his opportunity, but we do not think that to
lecture should be the automatic right or duty of the university teacher. The
weakness of the lecture as a sole method of instruction is that it does not ensure
effort from the student, and brings no ‘feed back’ from him.

384. Good teaching by discussion (seminars and tutorials) requires an
antecedent effort from the student, and this is best evoked by setting written
work to be discussed at the next meeting. Teaching by discussion and written
work done in the student’s own time are in our view inseparable if each is_ to
have its full value, and important in science as well as in arts. The introduction
of more discussion periods should be matched by an increase in the amount
of private study. Rightly used they are a way of making the student do for
himself what is too often done for him; so used they should not be unduly
expensive or burdensome on staff.

385. In Chapter VIII we discuss practical classes, in which students of pure
and applied science respectively spend 8 and 7 hours a week on average.
Practical classes are commonly attended by more than one teacher, and have
value in bringing teachers, research workers and students into personal contact

116

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

as well as in training students in the techniques of science. Practical work is
esseiitial in laboratory subjects and is usually obligatory, but if more time is to
be given to discussion periods and the private study that should go with them,
and if laboratory space is to be more efficiently used, the time given to practical
classes may have to be reduced. After discussing the uses of drawing office and
example classes, we conclude that at a time of expansion a critical study, subject
by subject, is required of the role of practical and other similar classes.

386. In Chapter IX we take up the subject of examinations, the passing of
which is a primary consideration in the minds of most students. Accordingly,
the scope and character of examinations, and the questions which students
must answer, should be such that in preparing for examinations they will not
be able to avoid being educated. This may make it appear that the examiner
is the dominant partner, but in our universities teachers and examiners are in
general the same people. At many universities more than nine out of every ten
university teachers said that they would be taking part in the examinations in
the session 1961-62.

387. Most university teachers said that they considered the existing system of
examinations the best way both of giving students an incentive to work hard
and also of assessing undergraduate quality. A majority also considered that
students were examined with about the right frequency. But there is in fact
more than one system of examinations, and much variation in the frequency
with which they are held. Some of these contrasts embody important differences
of educational policy. We discuss these differences, and say that it is satisfactory
to find that experimental innovations are being introduced or proposed in a
number of university examinations. Continued study and experiment is important
for two reasons. Examinations should measure as well as possible not only the
candidate’s knowledge but also the qualities and habits of mind for which his
degree should vouch; and their effect on the student’s education should be
beneficial and encourage good teaching.

388. Equipment for teaching is briefly considered in Chapter X. Of all
equipment, books and periodicals are the most important need. How this need
should be met has been referred to another committee, but we have to consider
the consequences for teaching of a failure to meet it. A lack of books may
necessitate lectures which would not otherwise be required, and in view of the
importance of teaching students to work on their own we think universities
might consider whether there are any improvements in book supplies that
might make it possible to discontinue certain lectures. In some universities an
increase in book supplies might be necessary if teaching by discussion period
were to be increased.

389. Another obstacle to an increase in teaching by discussion may be
accommodation. The proportion of the university teachers’ sample without a
private room in which they could conveniently teach ranged from 5 per cent at
Oxford and Cambridge to 39 per cent in Scotland, and there was much
complaint about accommodation for teaching by tutorial or seminar. Most of
the sample were satisfied with lecture rooms, but there was considerable com-
plaint about laboratories, particularly for Biology and Geography. Nearly half
of the sample were dissatisfied about secretarial assistance, and of those whose
work needed technical assistance, three out of five were dissatisfied.

117

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

390. University teachers were asked certain questions about their use of
audio-visual aids, and we summarise their answers to these questions, but we
only deal briefly with this matter as it has since been referred to another
committee.

391. This chapter ends by considering the possible use of ‘programmed
learning’ for university teaching. Tliis form of teaching seems to us to be sound
in principle, and prima facie applicable to some forms of university teaching,
but the preparation of a programme is a most exacting and time-coitsunung
process, so that if it were to be economic, the resulting programme would have
to be widely used. The usefulness of ‘programmed learning’ in universities can
only be tested by trial and error, and for this inter-university co-operation with
ad-hoc finance would be necessary.

392. In the final chapter (XI) we discuss university teaching as a matter for
training and study. One in ten of the sample of university teachers said that they
had completed courses of training as teachers, and most of these said that this
training had been an advantage to them as university teachers. One in five had
received other training. Two out of three had checked on the efliciericy of their
lecturing technique. In nearly all universities training or instruction in teaching
is limited to informal advice and guidance, but nearly three in five of our sample
thought that newly appointed university teachers should receive some form of
organised instruction or guidance on how to teach. We do not favour any
prolonged course of training, but we think present arrangements unduly
haphazard. Demonstrating in laboratories is sufficiently taught on the job, but
there is in our view a good deal more that might be done to help the inexperienced
in the skills of giving tutorials and lectures. Such help should be given as a matter
of course to all newly appointed staff, without waiting until complaints are
heard or mistakes have hardened into habits. We discuss the ways in which
this help might be given.

393. Relatively little experiment on methods of university teaching has so far
been carried out in this country. This we believe to be because there is little to
tempt a university teacher to give to a study of teaching methods time which
inclination and self-interest would lead him to give to research in his own subject.
In America large sums have been made available by the Ford Foundation for
operational research in teaching, including college and university teaching. We
give some examples of the work done in that country as showing the method of
attack on teaching problems which we think might, with advantage, be adopted
here.

394. If during the forthcoming period of expansion the standard of university
education is to be maintained, and if at the same time no more than legitimate
claims are to be made on the national revenue and pool of ability, then
university buildings and plant and the time of university teachers will have to
be better used. This makes the need for operational research and experiment in
university teaching still more pressing. Such experiment should be conducted
on an inter-university basis. In our view there are three main requirements, a
body to promote and steer a programme of experiment; finance to meet the
cost of experiments; and adequate publication of their results.

395. We cannot conclude without expressing our deep gratitude to our
“cretary, Mr. A. Tattersall, for all that he has done, in the midst of increasing

118

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

commitments in
running of our
administration, i

My, 1964.

other directions, to lighten our labours and ensure the smooth
inquiry. We owe much to his wide experience of university
rut still more to his unfailing tact and cheerful patience.

E. Hale.

R. G. D. Allen.

D. G. Christopherson.

J. S. Fulton.

J. H. E. Griefiths.

J. E. Harris.

A. G. Lehmann.

May McKisack.

J. S. Morrison.

Mary R. Price.

E. M. Wright.

119

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX I

LIST OF PERSONS AND BODIES WHO
SUBMITTED MATERIAL

to specific requests from us :

The Headmasters’ Conference
The Independent Television Authority
The Mathematics Association
The National Union of Students

The Physics Society, Queen Mary College, University of London

Dr. T. H. Matthews.

After we had finished taking evidence from Universities, we received oral evidence
from Professor J. S. Roskell and Professor A. M. Boase, who at our request
elucidated certain points on which we required more information.

mentioned in para. 2 and 3 of the Report, the following

Sir Eric Ashby.

Dr. M. Bassey.

Mr. D. R. Bell.

Dr. E. B. Butler.

Dr. E. F. Caldin.

Dr. Mary L. Cartwright.
Mr. a. B. Cleoo.

Dr. S. W. Cohen.

Professor T. L. Cottrell.
Professor F. S. Dainton.
Mr. E. J. Dearnaley.

Dr. D. E. C. Eversley.

Dr. K. Garrad.

Dr. C. W. Gibey.

Mr. W. Best Harris.

Dr. F. G. Healey.

Dr. a. j. Hedges.

Professor H. Kay.

Professor W. G. Maclagan.
Dr. N. Malleson.

Dr. L. C. Marquis.

Mr. P. Marris.

Mr. R. B. McCallum.

Dr. H. S. N. McFarland.
Professor W. E. Morton.
Professor D. J. O’Connor.
Mr. a. Pennington.

Dr. j. a. Petch.

Professor J. Pilley.
Professor R. L. Reid.

Dr. R. Rose.

Professor D. C. Rowan.
Dr. a. P. Rowe.

Mr. a. Samuels.

Mr. W. M. Stern.
Professor E. G. L. Stones.
Dr. H. F. W. Taylor.

Mr. N. W. B. Thompson.
Professor B. Thwaites.
Professor J. P. Tuck.

Mr. P. E. Tucker.

Mr. S. Z. Walters.
Professor M. Weatherall.
Professor G. Zuntz.

120

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX n

QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSITIES

Note. In these questions the term ‘student’, unless the context otherwise requires,
means an undergraduate student. The questions should be read as applying to
the teaching of students other than those pursuing courses in Medicine
Dentistry and Veterinary Science,

1. Has any study of methods of university teaching been made in the University,
either by its Department of Education or otherwise, the results of which could
be made available to the Committee?

2. (a) Is any training or instruction in teaching given to members of staff?

(6) Has there been any discussion on the desirability of doing this, and if so, with
what result?

3. Lectures

(a) The Committee would be interested to know what the university, or any of
its faculties, regards as the function of the lecture in the scheme of teaching.

(b) What should the student get from listening to lectures and taking notes of
them, beyond what he could get from reading or from participation in
discussion groups (seminars or tutorials)?

(rf) Should the student be left to make his own notes of a lecture, or should he be
provided, whether by dictation or in writing, with a ready-made summary
composed by the lecturer? Where the student is expected to make his own
notes, are steps taken to see that he does so, and that he writes them up
afterwards?

The Committee believe that in some courses a series of lectures is used as
the framework round which the course, or part of it, is built. They would be
interested to know in which courses, if any, in your university the lecture has
this function.

Where lectures are the main vehicle for teaching, the Committee would be
interested to know whether it is considered that an attempt should be made to
cover the whole of the syllabus with lectures, or whether the student may be
expected, in his final examination, to answer questions which have not been
dealt with in any lectures available to him.

(e) Has policy in this matter been influenced by difficulties in ensuring that all
students in a course have access to necessary books or periodicals and/or
facilities for reading?

4. Teachers who supervise students’ courses and who give small-group teaching may
be divided into the following types :

A. those who are responsible for supervising the studies of the students allocated
to them, but who do not give them small-group or individual teaching;

B. those who give small-group or individual teaching to students sent to them
for the purpose, but who do not supervise the studies of such students apart
from setting them reading or other work to be done in preparation for a
teaching period ;

C. those who combine the functions of types A and B.

121

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

(i) The Committee would like to be informed:

(a) in what subjects and for what classes of student use is made m the
university of each of types A, B and C;

(b) whether, when type B is employed for students of any class, the
^ ^ student attends a series of periods conducted for at least a term by

the same teacher, who thus comes to know him and can assess hts
progress;

(d) whether it would he desired to make more use of any of the above
types (A, B or C), and if so, of which, if the necessary staff and
accommodation were available.

(ii) The Committee would be interested to know what, in the view of the
University or any of its faculties, are the limitations of the discussion
group (seminar or tutorial) and in particular, what is the size of group
above or below which the usefulness of the method declines.

5. Do you find that the supervision of students whose courses overlap more than
one department sets a special problem, and if so, how do you meet it .

6 How far are you able, or do you consider it desirable, to vary the methods of
■ supervision and teaching used for students (a) of differing ability; (6) of differing
standards of achievement on entry ; and (c) engaged on studies of differing degi ees
of specialisation?

7. (a) To what extent and under what conditions do you allow students to translct
from one kind of course to another (e.g., from subject to subject; from greater
specialisation to less, or vice versa; from honours to pass, or vice versa)?

(6) To what teaching problems do such transfers give rise, and how are they solved?

8 Apart from anything reported under the previous questions, what are the main
differences, if any, between the arrangements for supervising or methods ot
teaching first-year students and other students? In particular, is the teaching ot
first-year students apportioned between senior teachers and junior teachers
differently, as a matter of considered policy, from the teaching of students ot
later years?

9. (a) Has teaching in any department of the University been adversely affected, or
put in danger of being so affected, by teaching posts being unfilled owing to
lack of applicants?

(b) If so, have any special measures (e.g. using graduate students) been taken, to
avert or minimise these affects?

10. Are any unusual or experimental teaching techniques in operation or under
discussion which might be of interest to the Committee ?

11. What academic requirements, apart from the passing of any prescribed examina-
tions, does the student have to satisfy in order that he may be permitted to continue
his studies and to be admitted to his final examination? Is he, for example, required
to attend certain lectures or other forms of teaching in order to be admitted, and
is this requirement enforced; or does he simply have to satisfy some person or
body that his progress is satisfactory?

12. It is sometimes said that too much of the time of students is occupied in receiving
instruction and attending laboratories, leaving them insufficient time for reading
and other activities. Has the university, or any of its colleges/faculties, considered
as a matter of policy the number of hours per week which a student should spend
in receiving instruction and attending laboratories?

122

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

13. Libraries.

{a) Are there any arrangements, and if so, what, for giving instruction to new
(or other) students on how to make the best use of the library facilities open
to them, or is this left to individual teachers?

{b) hi which libraries of the university/college are students given access to open
shelves? When it is not given, what are the reasons?

(d) Has any general policy been laid down governing the purchase for the libraries
of the university/college (main, faculty or departmental) of more than one
copy each of reference or standard works of the kind regularly required by
students?

14. Use of vacations by students.

(fl) To what extent are students given programmes of reading or other work
related to their courses of study to be done in any of the vacations?

(/)) are any university/college premises available for student use during any of the
vacations? Are students of other universities allowed to use them?

(c) is any teaching on subjects in their courses offered to students in any vacation,
whether in a ‘long-vacation term’ or otherwise?

{d) are students given any test (other than the repeat of an examination failed
in the previous term) to see whether any work set for a vacation has been done?

(e) are any measures, not reported under {.a)-{d) or under 1 3(c), taken to encourage
students to do work related to their courses of study during vacation?

123

( 90678 )

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX III

NATIONAL UNION OF STUDENTS

With the welcome expansion in the number of students now entering universities in
this country, much concern is felt by the National Union of Students that the quality
of the teaching enjoyed by university students shall not suffer in consequence.

It is not enough to admit a person to the university and then to leave him entirely
to his own devices. The right attitude to learning is acquired under correct guidance
and is not necessarily innate in every student.

The study of teaching method has in this country for far too long been related
directly with the schools and not with the universities. At many of our conferences,
students over the years have expressed dissatisfaction with university teaching methods.
We are, therefore, extremely pleased to welcome the establishment of the Committee
to enquire into university teaching methods as a first step towards removing some of
the defects in teaching methods at our universities.

The National Union of Students as the nationally representative student organisation
in this country was one of the bodies invited to submit its views to the Committee
under the chairmanship of Sir Edward Hale. This we have been pleased to do in the
form of the memorandum which follows.

J. Gwyn Morgan
PresUIeni

124

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

McniorantUm! to the Hale Conwiitlee on University Teaching Methods appointed by the
University Grants Committee, published by the National Union of Students of
England, Wales and Northern Ireland, June 1961.

INTRODUCTION

1. The National Union of Students believes that, both in the national and general
social interest, all people capable of benefiting from higher education should have the
opportunity of doing so and that it should be a matter of the gravest concern that the
quality of such education should be the highest possible. Thus it is our aim that the
standards of teaching at the Universities should be raised to its highest possible level
and we include in this Memorandum some ideas as to how we feel this might be
achieved.

2. Wc should say now that we believe that some form of real personal association
with some member or members of academic staff is essential to the student throughout
his university career. This may be achieved through lectures, tutorials, or small group
discussions, or practical classes (in some faculties) or a combination of these. For our
purposes, we shall define a lecture as an address by a member of staff to a group of
students, possibly followed or interrupted by questions. A tutorial we shall define
as a meeting of a member of staff with one or possibly more students during which
di.scussions take place generally on lines suggested by the tutor. A seminar is a group
which meets to discuss a specific topic and at which say, six to eight students might
be present with a member or members of academic staff, and possibly a limited number
of postgraduate students.

Except where otherwise stated, our criticisms and suggestions do not refer to specific
faculties or specific Universities. In general we feel our comments to be widely
applicable, and trust that they will be examined as such.

LECTURES

3. The use of the lecture as a means of teaching in British Universities is widespread
and thus wc have felt it our duty to consider it critically and to make suggestions as
to how we feel it can be adapted to serve better the aims of a University education.
Our two major criticisms of the lecture are that it is not capable of allowing a full
discussion of points of interest and, secondly, that all too frequently it is used as a
means of communicating information and ideas which are adequately covered in
readily available texts.

4. For the large majority of students the lecture is the occasion on which many of
them gather together to listen to one man or woman. The physical arrangement of
the class and the presence of large numbers of students means that, although questions
may be asked of the lecturer, time and the convenience of the majority do not allow
for a full and penetrating discussion of specific topics. If the lecture is the only means
of association between staff and student, or the only means encouraged, many of the
students’ questions will go completely unanswered. It is, therefore, important that
whether teaching is undertaken through lectures or not, some close association between
academic staff and student must be fostered in order that problems arising during the
student’s course of studies can receive a thorough airing.

5. Though it is clear that such is not always the case, we receive many complaints
from our members that many lectures become the means whereby the lecturer, with
the aid of a blackboard, presents material which can easily be obtained from books
or other printed matter. In such a case the end product for the student is a few pages
of notes forming, in all probability, a poor prdcis of what transpired during the lecture,
and which could have been better and more productively obtained by spending an
equivalent period in the library. It is our view that such lectures are of little value and
would, therefore, recommend that, in no case should lectures be expected to include

125

(90678) I*

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

in detail material which is already available and covered adequately in books, papers,
etc. If this principle is adopted, however, we must again stress the need tor regulat
and close association between student and staff member; for problems can arise m the
student’s work and it is essential that he has an easy and recognised means ol contact
with a senior person who is capable of helping him.

6. What use, then, is the lecture? Clearly it provides the opportunity for a

of staff to communicate with his students in large numbers at a time, and we feel that
this is desirable for a number of reasons. In each course it will be necessary occasiona.liy
to outline the general direction which studies may be expected to correlate mateiia)
which has recently been published.

7. We further believe in the intrinsic value of lectures given by members of the
University staff not necessarily on any specific part of the student’s syllabus but on the
research work or special field of study of the lecturer concerned. This would ensure
that the lecturer would at least be dealing with a subject which interested him and
about which he would feel enthusiastic: the student might well receive some of this
enthusiasm and interest and both lecturer and student would be spared the tediurn
of the present lecture system where the lecturer is forced to talk about matters m which
he has no basic interest and in many cases no special qualification. We ieel that mere
would be sufficient returns in terms of stimulation of the student’s mind to justity
such lectures.

8. A revision of the lecture system such as we have proposed will mean that a great
deal of material already included in many lecture courses will be omitted in the future,
the amount depending upon the adequacy of the writing on the subject. In this case
the actual number of lectures could be cut, so allowing students more time for piivate
study and a fuller participation in the life of the University community generally, and
the academic staff more time to devote to tutorial work. It is perhaps woith noting
here that a recent survey* undertaken at Sheffield University showed that 85 pci cent
of students in one faculty, Engineering, were committed to organised academic work
for 21 or more hours per week. Only 21 per cent of students of this faculty spent
more than five hours per week working in a library. We have reason to believe that a
similar situation is not uncommon elsewhere. Whilst this kind of state of affaiis exists,
we feel that everything should be done to reduce the number of hours a student is
committed to organised academic work, and it is our view that a reduction in the load
of lectures would be of great value in this respect.

9. Perhaps it should be noted here that many members of academic staff, and not
without grounds, feel that the majority of students regard University as a continuation
of school and will not work unless made to, and that lectures are a good way of ensuring
that the student knows what is required of him. Firstly, this attitude of the staff is
one which we deplore. Surely the duty of the academic staff is to encourage .students
to learn for themselves and to seek knowledge for its own sake rather than to insist
that certain material must be known for the purpose of passing examinations. Secondly,
in case the substance of the argument is admitted, if an adequate system of tutorials
is set up following a reduction in the lecture load, members of staff will be better able
to guide students in their academic work than through any lecture system.

10. A further criticism we have of lectures as we experience them at present is that
they are frequently ill-prepared and badly presented, and we fear that, even though
the structure of the lecture system be changed, those lectures which are retained may
be equally poor in quality. The solution to this problem is simply to ensure that those
who undertake lecture work are suitably qualified to do so. This is developed later
in the Memorandum.

11. If it is to be successful, any reform of teaching methods in the Universities which
relies on the students making greater use of printed matter means that everything
must be done to ensure that the student has adequate access to all material ho may

* 1 961 Survey, University of Sheffield Union of Students.

126

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

reasonably require, and suitable means of consulting it. To this end, it is essential
that every University has a good library and reading rooms which may be used at
hours convenient to the student, and that all students be encouraged and financially
assisted to build up an adequate personal library of those books likely to be required
frequently during his course. At present, even though it may be considered that these
points are equally valid, whether or not there are changes in teaching method, it is
to be regretted that the availability of books and the hours of opening of many
University libraries could be improved and, further, the majority of students fee] unable
to afford to buy as many books as they feel are necessary to their studies.

TUTORIALS

12. Although we have said earlier that we believe that a tutorial system is essential
if our proposals on lectures are adopted, we should say that there are other more
valid reasons for the necessity of such a system. The essential quality of a tutorial
is that it provides the opportunity for the student to meet and talk frequently with one
who is, or should be, specially qualified to help and guide him in all aspects of his
academic work. We believe this to be so important that it is our view that every student,
regardless of his course of study, should have the opportunity of benefiting from regular
participation in tutorials or small group discussions led by a member of the academic
staff. It should be stressed, however, that the tutorial is not serving its purpose if it
merely becomes the occasion on which the student can have his current academic
problems answered. The role of the tutorial must be much more than this. It must be
the tutor’s aim to arouse the intellectual curiosity of the student, to develop a healthy
spirit of criticism and to encourage him to think constructively in and around his
chosen subject. The fundamental diflference between learning in this manner and
learning through the means of mass communication is that the student really does a
great deal more for himself. In the tutorial he has a better opportunity of exploring
particular points of interest more deeply and immediately, and the good tutor will
encoui-age him to do so.

13. Wc appreciate that such a system is already in operation in a number of Universities
but wc are concerned that often tliat which passes as a tutorial system or personal
supervision amounts to no more than a series of individual problem solving sessions.
It has occasionally been said, for instance, that students of science and technology
already benefit from close personal supervision through careful organisation of
laboratory and ether practical work. Whilst the value of such supervision is appreciated,
we do not feel that this can be a suitable substitute for tutorial teaching. Every science
and technology student knows that discussion between staff and student during a
practical usually related to the immediate problem on hand, or possibly, other related
problems. Laboratories and drawing offices are not really suitable places for conducting
a discussion of the fundamental principles of one’s subject. We would recommend,
therefore, that University departments which have previously considered such super-
vision to bo sufficient for their students’ needs be urged to consider the advisability
of setting up a tutorial system in addition.

14. Apart from its value to the student, the tutorial has a very significant value for
members of the academic staff, the tutors. Tutorials demand a much greater breadth
of knowledge than is necessary for giving even a number of courses of lectures, for the
tutor must be able and prepared to answer the most penetrating questions on all
branches of his subject. Surely ability to do this should be encouraged among
University staff and will, in turn, be of great value to students.

1 5. In our view, too high a value cannot be placed on the tutorial. Each student is
constantly in contact with a member of academic staff who encourages and guides
him through the time he is at University, and develops a personal knowledge of him
which is invaluable in making assessments of his work. Such a system is bound to help
in the establishment of closer relationships between staff and student members of the

127

(906781 I* 2

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

University community, which, we feel, at a time of University expansion demands moie
urgent attention than hitherto. It is a source of great regret to us that many students
pass through a University without really establishing a close personal contact with it,
and as the Universities get bigger, we fear that the difficulty which the student has in
identifying himself with the rest of the University community is going to become
more severe. It is essential, therefore, that every effort is made to counteract this
tendency and we feel that tutorials have a valuable contribution to make m this respect.

16. A disadvantage of the tutorial system is that its value to the student depends
greatly on the qualities of his tutor. This could be unfortunate, even disastrous, lor
the student who finds himself attached to a poor tutor throughout his course. The
problem can be minimised, however, by ensuring that all members of staff appointed
to undertake tutorial work are suitably qualified to do so, and by allowing for a
change of tutor at appropriate points in the course.

17. The tutorial system, as we have proposed it, is only practicable we feel lor the
special subject of the specialist student and the main courses of the general studies
student. Although desirable, learning of subsidiary subjects through tutorials is
impracticable and it is our view that such learning can be carried out by the discrimin-
ating use of lectures and books without any great detriment to the student. We would
emphasise here, however, the importance of the availability of staff members for
consultation and hope that, where students may normally be expected to rely on
lectures and books, members of staff will make it clear that they are available to be
consulted about points of difficulty.

18. The case of the general studies student merits special attention for it is such a
■student who, at present, is more unlikely to establish any sense ol personal identity
with the University. At least other students ‘belong’ to a department. The very nature
of his course often makes it appear that he is getting less attention in teaching and
■other matters than the special studies student. Although it may be administiativcly
difficult to organise therefore, every attempt should be made to ensure that he takes
tutorials in each of his main subjects. Tills may, indeed, mean that such tutorials will
be taken less frequently in each subject. Since each subject is not being pursued to
special degree level, this should not be of great detriment to his studies.

19. It has frequently been argued that the establishment of a proper tutorial sytem
is not feasible on the grounds of lack of academic staff. Whilst we admit that the
number of tutors available in relation to the number of students is a controlling factor,
however, information which we have from students at Universities and University
Colleges which are in membership of the National Union of Students (and there aie
few which are not) shows that the existence of a tutorial system often depends more
on the enthusiasm of members of staff than on the staff/student ratio. Thus we believe
that tutorials could be established as a major means of teaching in many Universities
where they do not already exist if only the staff could be convinced of their value.
In cases where sufficient numbers of academic staff are not available at present, so
that the setting up of a tutorial system is quite impracticable, we would most strongly
urge that close consideration be given to problems of obtaining more staff. For we do
feel that the student who has not had regular tutorials throughout his University
career cannot be said to have benefited as much as he otherwise would from being at
University. Whilst we appreciate that University education is expensive, it is our view
that additional expense in ensuring that every student is able to benefit from regular
contact with member of academic staff through tutorials will greatly improve the
value of his University education.

20. In the meantime, whilst sufficient members of staff do not exist in some depart-
ments (though we do feel this could quite speedily be rectified) we rate so highly the
value of education through discussion that we would ask the Committee to consider
that where teaching through tutorials is impracticable teaching should always be
undertaken through seminars at which a greater number of students would be present
with one staff member than at a tutorial.

128

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

SEMINARS

21. Whilst wo have said that we believe tutorials are an essential part of any method
of university teaching it should be also said that we feel seminars have a very valuable
and independent contribution to make to U niversity education and are equally essential
if the quality of University teaching is to be the very best.

22. The essential quality of the seminar is that it provides the opportunity for students
to discuss topics of mutual interest more or less in public. Argument before a critical
audience ensures that the debate is thorough. Ideas put forward can immediately be
challenged by any member of the group and thus lead to a penetrating discussion of
the particular points raised. Frequent involvement in such discussions leads the student
to accept the need for a thorough analysis of each hypothesis with which he is con-
fronted in his studies and thus makes a very valuable contribution to the development
of his approach to learning.

23. A seminar should always be led by a member or members of academic staff for it is
to be hoped that these people will have the breadth of vision to direct the discussion
along the most valuable lines. In addition, we feel that one or two postgraduate research
students can make a useful contribution to the discussion. In the first instance they
form a valuable social link between the staff member and the students in age and
outlook, and secondly they bring to the discussion the new approach which they have
developed in their research work. Postgraduate students alone should not be relied
upon to lead seminars since it is likely that they have not yet sufficiently developed
their range of knowledge and experience to be of great value in this respect.

24. Whilst we believe the seminar to be of value in the teaching of all subjects we
would urge the Committee to consider in particular its value in the teaching of subsidiary
subjects. Frequently students undertaking a particular subsidiary subject come from
a wide range of primary disciplines and represent differing approaches. It is therefore
likely that a discussion between them of topics of mutual interest will be extremely
broadly based and pai'ticularly valuable.

THE TRAINING OF UNIVERSITY TEACHERS

25. Previously in this Memorandum, we have referred to the necessity of ensuring
that the university teacher is suitably qualified to lecture and to supervise tutorial
work. Generally it may be said that the great majority of university teachers have
received no direct training in the teaching aspects of their work and we doubt that
much consideration is given to the candidates’ teaching abilities when a vacancy for a
lecturer occurs. It is our belief that the university lecturer should be as well able to
undertake his teaching duties as he is likely to be to pursue his research. If this were
generally the case, we would expect a great improvement in the quality of University
lecturing and tutorial work.

26. In order to ensure tliat members of staff are suitably qualified to underta
teaching, it will be necessary for University departments to insist that prospect
members of staff shall have shown that they are capable of performing such dutie,
proficiently before they arc appointed. For this to be a practicable proposition, it will
be necessary to arrange courses in the techniques of University teaching for intending
University staff'. If it is not possible or it is inconvenient to arrange such courses before
start' members take up their teaching duties we would recommend that they might be
undertaken concurrently with the first year’s teaching. It may be expected that such
training will meet a great deal of opposition, but we sincerely believe that there is
hardly a member of academic staff who will not admit, perhaps only to himself, that
his teaching might have been better than it now is if he had been given the opportunity
of benefiting from a course in the techniques of University teaching.

27. Whilst we trust that the Committee will seriously consider this suggestion, we
would hope that it will also consider the desirability of providing courses in the method

129

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

of teaching for existing University teachers, perhaps to be taken during the summer
vacation. T. H. Matthews* has shown that even a short course, well designed, can
bring about a great improvement in teaching ability and we would, therefore, commend
this to the Committee.

SOME PROBLEMS RELATED TO UNIVERSITY TEACHING

(i) Compulsory Lectures

28. It has been brought to our attention that at a great number of Universities and
University Colleges, attendance at lectures is compulsory, if only nominally in sorne
cases. We believe this to be a most unfortunate infringement of the student’s academic
freedom, believing that a student should feel himself as equally free to choose which
lectures he goes to as he is to select which books he reads. Such compulsion leads the
student to feel that he is not considered sufficiently responsible to mould to some extent
his own intellectual development and thus leads to a complete negation of that attitude
which we would hope the Universities would encourage, that is that the students
would consider one of their primary aims in being at University to be learning for
themselves. It has been said in defence of compulsory lectures that where public money
is being spent on the student’s University education, it is the duty of the University
to ensure that the money is being well used. We would have hoped that the Universities,
of all institutions, would have been sufficiently free of public pressure not to feel
obliged to make lectures compulsory to this end, and to point out that attendance
at lectures does not necessarily mean that money is being well spent. Better value, in
fact, might be achieved by private study,

(ii) Syllabuses and Examinations

29. It is to be regretted that in many University departments rigidly fixed syllabuses
and the nature of examination papers often encourage an unhealthy attitude of the
smdent to his work. When the student knows that to get his degree he has to answer
questions, many of which require factual answers, on examination papers which are
likely to be similar to those of previous years and which are based on a syllabus which
is laid down in writing in the University calendar, it is not surprising that his enthusiasm
for learning for its own sake may wilt and possibly die. It is our belief that any change
in actual teaching method which may take place as a result of the Committee’s work
will be of little value unless a thorough study is also made of the influence of the
specified content of courses and the system of examinations on the student’s attitude
to his work. Unfortunately, we do not have precise evidence on this matter which we
can place before the Committee, but we do feel that this is of such significance that
we would recommend that the Committee undertakes a study such as that suggested
and uses its results in drawing its conclusions.

(iii) Teaching and Research

30. Frequently we receive complaints from our members that members of staff
appear to be more interested in their research than in teaching the students. Although
we appreciate that this is a complex and controversial issue we feel that from our
point of view we can do no better than to quote and support Ur. 1. L. Kandel, Professor
Emeritus, Teachers College, Columbia University, Professor Emeritus and sometime
Editor of the Universities Quarterly:

‘The importance of research for the advancement of knowledge and scholarship
has everywhere been recognised as the major function of a University. Nevertheless,
important as research and the training of students to carry on research may be,
it would be unfortunate if a higher premium were placed on research than
teaching. At the University level teaching becomes enriched by research. At a

* T. H. Matthews ‘The Training of University Teachers’— Universities Quarterly, Vol. 5,
1950/51, pp. 269-274,

130

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

time when the number of students is increasing and when the majority are not
planning to devote themselves to scholarly careers, more attention must be devoted
to the quality of teaching than when teachers and students come together as
masters and disciples. At some stage in their University career, all students should
be made familiar with the methods of research, but instruction cannot be given
on the assumption that all will become research workers. There thus arises the
paradox that, while for members of University staff there can be no dichotomy
between teaching and research, the primary responsibility to the students is to
transmit what Whitehead called orthodox knowledge with an appreciation of its
meaning and relevance and to introduce them to those areas which require
discussion, investigation and testing.’*

We believe this to be every bit as valid today as it was when it was written (1948).
(iv) University Induction

31. Finally we fear that all too often there exists a deep gulf between school tuition
methods and University teaching, which often contributes to psychological upset
during the first year at University and which, in turn, leads to wastage. In our view
everything should be done to reduce such psychological disturbance to a minimum and
we feel that this can best be assisted by a closer alignment of teaching methods used
in the later years at school and the earlier years at University. Further, we would stress
the need for a gentler and more generalised introduction to the course and it is probably
during the first few weeks of a student’s University life that a tutor will be most valuable.
We feel guidance at this initial stage to be particularly valuable at a time when many
more students are first generation University students coming from families with no
academic experience or traditions.

CONCLUSION

32. One of the most disheartening things about preparing material for this Mem-
orandum is that we consistently came across writings and reports of speeches by
important and influential personalities in the University world who had expressed in
the past (sometimes many years ago) ideas similar to those which we are now putting
forward for the Committee’s attention. And yet we fear that the quality of University
teaching has not improved over recent years and, in fact, are inclined to believe that
it is declining with the expansion of the Universities. Whilst we have complete faith
that the Committee will produce a useful and stimulating report, we sincerely hope
that it will not become an addition to the file marked ‘NO ACTION TO BE TAKEN’.

* ‘Suggested Agenda for University Conferences,’ Universities Quarterly, Vol. 2 1947/8-
pp. 247-253.

131

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX IV

SCOTTISH UNION OF STUDENTS

SUBMISSIONS TO THE TEACHING METHODS
SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE UNIVERSITY
GRANTS COMMITTEE

INTRODUCTION

I . The Scottish Union of Students welcomed the announcement from the University
Grants Committee that it had set up a sub-committee under the Chairmanship of
Sir Edward Hale ‘to make a comparative study of undergraduate teaching methods
and practice current in the Universities and Colleges in the field of Arts and Pure and
Applied Science’. Scottish students have, as far as we can ascertain, always had some
criticism of teaching methods but over the last two or three years, the criticism has
become more widespread and forceful. This criticism has been expressed to the
University Grants Committee on its recent quinquennial visit to Scotland by Students’
Representative Councils in their memoranda submitted to the Committee. What has
struck us most is the complacency concerning methods of teaching existing in many
quarters in the Universities. We hope the Committee can stimulate individual
institutions to ask themselves whether their teaching methods can be improved. The
Union is continuing to look into this problem and is co-operating with its constituent
S.R.C.s on this important aspect of University life.

THE IMPORTANT DIRECT EFFECTS
OF TEACHING METHODS

2. Three of the most obvious effects are; —

(а) the level of student failures :

(б) the number of students who take longer than normal to complete a particular
course :

Although the first and second effects are the ones which receive most publicity, we
feel that the third is the more important one as it obviously affects a far larger number
for a far longer period.

THE FOUR IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF TEACHING METHODS

3. We feel that to consider the implications of teaching methods on the three points
in the previous paragraph, the following four subjects must be reviewed;

(i) Subjects taught
Cii) those taught

(iii) the teachers

(iv) the methods and practice of teaching.

132

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

(i) SUBJECTS TAUGHT

4. The Universities must in our opinion continue to provide an academic education
primarily even although in some subjects a training is given simultaneously. We will
briefly consider the subjects taught in each of the faculties of Arts, Pure Science and
Applied Science. We emphasise here the need to ensure that the student graduates
with a correct attitude to learning.

The Arts Faculty

5. (a) The Ordinary A/./l.— The ordinances for this degree vary considerably through;
the Scottish Universities. We would like to sec this degree remaining as a general
education with a broad basis of subjects and with no great degree of specialisation.
We feel the course for the Ordinary M.A. should include:

(1) a Philosophy

(2) a Science; and

(3) a Language.

The choice given to a student within each of these categories must be wide to cope
with differing individual abilities. Even with the Ordinary degree we feel some degiee
of specialisation is necessary and that at least two subjects, possibly three, should be
taken up to a higher level.

(h) The Honours M.A . — It seems to us that the student takes an Honours course for
one of several reasons, c.g. —

(1) a path forward to a career in research

(2) to enable the graduate to go on to salary scales reaching higher levels, e.g.
the teaching profession ; or

(3) because Industry and Commerce are more likely to accept a candidate if he
has an Honours degree even if he will not use his Honours subject or subjects
in his chosen job.

In the Scottish Universities there is considerable variation in the ordinances for
the Honours M.A. degree. The Arts faculty in St. Andrews offer very few single
Honours courses while Edinburgh offer a considerable number. It is obvious that a
student doing a double Honour.s course does not reach the standard in either of his
subjects which a student doing a single Honours does. Some Scottish graduates who
have done a double Honours degree feel they arc at a disadvantage to the graduate
who has done a single Honours degree when they go on to post-graduate work.
Probably the Honours graduate who is going on to post-graduate work is better off*
with a single Honours in his special subject, while the Honours graduate who is not
going to use his degree subjects specifically Is probably better oft' with a double Honours
degree. It, therefore, seems to us that to cope with the individual needs it is necessary
for the Universities to offer both single and double Honours degrees in the faculty of
Arts. We realise this suggestion may bring difficulties for it may not be possible for
individual Universities, at present, to provide all subjects for both single and double
Honours degrees.

The Science Faculty

6. id) The Ordinary B.Sc . — For the ordinary B.Sc., as offered in the Scottish
Universities, we think that it should be necessary for the student to do a one year
course in an Arts subject. We realise that it is essential to provide a wide choice of
Arts subjects to cater for varying individual abilities. If a wide choice is not provided,
a single Arts subject may prove an obstacle to graduating for the student who is
capable of passing all his science subjects.

133

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

The combined degree of M.A., B.Sc., is very rarely taken now and in one University
at least, students are not encouraged to do it as it raises considerable timetable
difficulties. We hope that the opportunity to take this dep-ee will be more readily
available, as it allows a student to have a degree of specialised knowledge in subjects
of both the Science and Arts Faculty.

(b) The Honours B.Sc.~Ovx general comments on Honours degrees in the Arts
faculty apply to those in the Science faculty and we feel that it should be possible to
do both double and single Honours degrees in the Faculty of Science. To do a double
science course at present in St. Andrews University it is necessary to do it under the
ordinances of the faculty of Arts, and then it is only possible in a few subjects.

The Applied Science Faculty

7. (a) The Ordinary De^ree—'^t feel here also that a one year Arts subject should
be necessary.

{b) The Honours Degree— Our comments on Honours degrees under the sections on
the Arts faculty and the Science faculty apply here and we would like to see double
Honours and single Honours degrees offered. In this context, we welcome the new
degree in general engineering being offered in St. Andrews University.

8. We have carefully considered the length of various courses and also the length
of the present academic terms. We consider that the length of the present courses
in years is in general adequate, but we favour each of the terms, as they exist in the
Scottish Universities at present, being extended to 12 weeks. Many students, particularly
in the Science and Applied Science faculties, feel that their course is too crammed and
they would like to have the opportunity of studying the subject more leisurely under
the guidance of their tutors. During the vacations, unless a student lives in a University
town, or can afford to live in one, he does not have the facilities of an adequate library
and the attempt by the student to study during his vacation is gravely hampered in
many cases. Also he does not have the contact with the members of the University
staff. We consider that three terms of 12 weeks will strike an ideal balance between
the needs of the student and the needs of the staff, who in many cases do much of
their research during the vacation periods.

While we can make no generalisations, we feel that many of the courses, particularly
in the sciences, should be subjected to critical analysis as to whether the content of
the course can be modified, cutting out some unnecessary details which do not have
practical application and are not of academic significance.

(ii) THOSE TAUGHT

9. (a) The effects of school and the entry to University . — Students matriculating for
the first time at Scottish Universities vary considerably in their standards of academic
attainment and their experience of methods of learning. Students who have taken the
advanced level of the General Certificate of Education have obviously taken their
subjects to a higher level than those who have done a higher level in the Scottish
Leaving Certificate. At present, the teaching methods used in the Universities in the
first year at least do not apparently take cognisance of the methods of study used in
the schools or, if they do, no serious attempt is made to bridge the gap and help the
student to adapt to the difficulties of this transition period. We are critical of the
methods of instruction used in many schools and hope that they can place the pupil
in his last two years at school in a positive role of acquiring knowledge and not in the
negative role of being spoon fed with detailed information necessary to pass
examinations. We believe that the system of University Entrance Bursary examinations
is in particular responsible for this system as many schools regard the number of
bursaries they achieve and their positions in the bursary list as being of vital importance

134

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

to the reputation of the school. We would like to see all entrance bursary examinations
done away with and if the Universities insist on giving bursaries for the first year, then
examination should not be the method of selection. We feel that the place for
Universities to offer their bursaries should be more at the end of the first year when
the student will have shown, or should have shown, how he will adapt to the University.

Very often students in their first year at University take the subjects which they
have studied at school. They are unaware of the many other possibilities which the
University ofiei's. We feel the necessary information could be got to them in two ways:

(i) Firstly by information being taken into the schools by the Universities.
In this j'cspect we welcome the moves taken in the last year or so by Edinburgh
University whose extra mural department ran a series of lectures on the
University for senior school children in Edinburgh. We hope that on this
matter the Universities, the local Education Authorities and the schools can
work in close co-operation.

(ii) Secondly the advice given to students on entry to the University is of vital
importance. In Edinburgh University the average time spent on each student
by a Director of Studies is four to five minutes. We believe that at least fifteen
minutes, if not more, should be allocated to each student and it may be
desirable that some individual students should see more than one Director
of Studies.

10. {b) During the course at University: Many factors affect the work of a student
during his stay in the University. Two of the most obvious are: —

(1) That accommodation for students should be satisfactory and that preferably
it should be in the form of Halls of Residence including, of course, University
residences in the form of flatlets. No matter how effective the teaching of the
staff is, if the student does not have adequate facilities for study where he
lives, much of the value of good teaching may be lost.

<2) That it is essential to have a good general library as well as class libraries and
also adequate reading room facilities where students can study during the
course of the day between lectures and also in the evenings.

THE TEACHERS

11. Both teaching and research are important activities of a University teacher.
The University teacher ought simultaneously to teach and to be at the frontiers of
knowledge, making an original contribution to knowledge. The two activities of
teaching and research should fertilise one another. It is important too that the
Universities should continue to do a considerable amount of disinterested research.
However, this does not mean that all University teaching staff should or need have a
primary interest in research and a secondary interest, or indeed no interest, in teaching
students. It must be remembered that Universities would not exist, on the present day
scale anyway, were it not for the undergraduate students.

At present it appears to us that too many university teaching appointments and
promotions are dependent primarily on the amount of published work an individual
has done. We were recently told by a member of a University Court of a Scottish
University of his experience as a member of a Committee appointing a professor.
He received many letters from individuals knowing the candidates. All the letters
referred to the published work of the candidate in journals and not one referred even
briefly to his abilities as a teacher. This system of appointment and promotion by
publication must cease and Universities must be prepared to recognise the value of a
member of staff who is primarily interested in teaching but who nevertheless has also
an interest in research on a smaller scale. The way must be opened for such individuals

135

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

to be promoted and given a status and salary which will encourage them to stay in the
academic world. It seems that different teachers spend varying amounts ^ time actually
teaching students, and we maintain that a minimum a member of staff should do is
10 hours of teaching a week on average.

METHODS OF TEACHING

12. The n:iajor methods of teaching used are;

(i) The Lecture.

(ii) The Tutorial.

(iii) The Seminar.

(iv) Practical Classes.

(v) Examinations.

13. (i) The Lecture. This is the basis of practically all teaching in the Faculties of
Arts, Pure Science and Applied Science of the Scottish Universities as it is in the
Royal College of Science and Technology in Glasgow. A lecture brings one member
of staff into contact with a large number of students but it does not give the persona!
contact which students would like to develop between themselves and members oi stan.

It has been said that lectures became an anachronism when Caxton introduced the
printing press to this country. We do not agree as we believe the lecture is a useful
method of teaching, but at the moment, in Scotland, too much emphasis is placed on it.
We see the function of the lecture to be an introduction to the subject and a stimulation
to the student to read further himself. At present, far too much detail is given in the
lecture course. In many courses it is possible, with an adequate set of lectuic notes,
to pass all class and degree examinations, sometimes with distinction. This is spoon-
feeding at its worst, and lecturers must not give enough material to enable a student
to pass his examinations. The fundamentals of the subject, and such details as are
necessary to explain these, should be covered in the lecture. The excessive details given
by many lecturers can so very easily be found in the textbook — sometimes one can
identify readily the particular textbook used by the lecturer in preparing his lecture.

The number of lectures must be reduced and their 'emphasis altered to provide a
stimulus to the student to adopt a positive role in acquiring knowledge rather than
the purely negative role of taking lecture notes adequate to pass examinations. The
time saved by reducing the number of lectures should be devoted to other methods of
teaching. We would like to see an extension of the practice of certain departments in
handing out, at lectures, duplicated sheets containing information not available in
books and a list of references for reading.

14. In most departments, by regulations attendance at lectures is required at a
high percentage of those given, and while many departments do not take registers,
some do, and insist on a certain percentage of possible attendances. We feel that
attendance at lectures should not be compulsory on any students. Some individuals
profit from attending lectures, while others regard it as a waste of time, and this fact
should be more widely recognised. We think that the actual attendance at lectiire.s
might well change if the lectures are altered in emphasis.

15. We accept that standards of lecturing are bound to vary, but we think that many
lecturers could benefit from receiving advice on lecturing techniques. Wo cannot
accept that the University teacher needs less skill and technique to teach than does
the school teacher, who is required to undergo training in educational methods.
We do not consider that the University teacher is more likely on the average to be
more gifted in the art of education than is the average school teacher. We, therefore,
feel that University teachers should partake in a course in educational methods, which

136

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

could, perhaps, be run by the Departments of Education in the Universities.
We envisage a short course of a month’s duration, which could be run in the vacation,
and a member of staft on appointment would be expected to go on such a course during
the first vacation. Obviously, most universities do not appoint, between each vacation,
a sufficient number of new members of staff to justify them organising a separate
course, and perhaps a particular university in each region could undertake the
responsibility of running these courses. There are in the Universities at present, many
members of staff who could benefit from such a course, and we hope they could be
encouraged to participate in one. In making this suggestion under the heading of
lectures we do not mean that instruction in the technique of lecturing alone should be
given, but all methods of teaching should be dealt with.

16. (ii) The Tutorial. The extent to which tutorials are used varies from University
to University and from department to department. At present many of the tutorials
consist of 10 to 14 students with one member of staff. All too often it develops into a
miniature lecture and in one instance, although called a tutorial, it was admitted that
it was used to complete the lecture course. If it does not take the form of a miniature
lecture, it very often takes the form of the extraction of answers by the tutors with no
effective discussion taking place. We look to the tutorial as being a meeting where a
free discussion, with guidance from the member of staff, may take place, sorting out
any difficulties which the individual student may have. We hope it will enable the
member of staff to find out how any individual student is progressing in a particular
subject and if necessary point out to the student that he is not progressing adequately
and help him understand his difficulties. It will also enable a personal relationship to
develop between the student and his teachers. This may lead some students, who
need to, to take a more responsible attitude to their studies. If a personal relationship
is to be developed, the number of students in a tutorial group must not exceed 6 or 7.

Essays are another method of putting the student in the positive role of acquiring
knowledge, and it is best for the student to meet his tutor and discuss it with him
personally. A useful method employed in one history department is to have a particular
student’s essay duplicated and issued to other members of the tutorial group before
the tutorial, when it is to be discussed.

All student opinion expressed to us is unanimous in the desire for more tutorials
to place students in a positive role in acquiring knowledge, to enable them to have
guidance when necessary and also enable students to make personal contact with
members of staff. The position in one University, where a student completing an
Honours course in English will not have had a single tutorial in any of his English
classes, cannot be allowed to continue. Nor is the once a fortnight tutorial in the
first year geography class of another University adequate.

17. At present the few tutorials which are conducted in Scottish Universities are
often not held in proper tutorial rooms, but in corners of lecture rooms or in
laboratories. Future buildings and modifications of present buildings must make
provision for adequate and suitable tutorial facilities.

18. The plea for an increased number of tutorials means an increase in the number
of staff. There are two problems involved in this. Firstly, it will cost money but we
believe that if the country wishes to get the best out of its universities it must be
pi-epared to provide the money, which Universities will have to request, if they are to
implement a wider tutorial system. Secondly, there is the problem of availability of
additional staff even if the money is available. Conditions in the Universities, including
prospects for promotion as we have mentioned earlier, must be sufficiently attractive
to provide a counter attraction to positions requiring persons similarly qualified.
As a generalisation, we have said that each member of staff should be expected to do
10 hours teaching with students per week. This could, in itself, in some departments,
mean more tutorials, without an increase in staff. The use of Ph.D. research students

137

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

for tutorials is widespread in the Scottish Universities, and while many can conduct
tutorials adequately, others give tutorials which are of little use to the students.
We would like to see a more selective use made of Ph.D. students for tutorials. A source
of potential tutors is the members of industrial and government research institutions.
They would have to be used very selectively on a part-time basis. This suggestion^
should only be taken up if the Universities cannot attract sufficient members of staff
themselves.

19. Extra staff cannot easily be acquired over a short period, and we feel that the
first need for an increase on the number of tutorials at present held, is in the first year,
where at present the student has with him the problems of his adaption to University
life.

20. (iii) Seminars. By this we mean joint discussion between several members of
staff and a group of students. This is only used to a very limited extent and we think
its use could be extended,

21. (iv) Practical Classes. These are found mainly in the faculties of Pure and
Applied Science. Practical classes seem to us to have the two functions of training
in manipulative technique and the demonstration of certain principles by the example
of experiment. Both functions, are important, but there is in some courses, too much
emphasis on technique and the student is not left to decide how to conduct his
experiment to solve the problem he has been asked to consider. The work of the
practical class must continuously be closely related to that of the lectures and tutorials.
Closer supervision by members of staff could help in many practicals to prevent
students doing an experiment without understanding the details which they follow
often mechanically, from printed instructions. Encouragement should be given to
the student to tackle problems on his own and to seek guidance where required.

22. (v) Examinations. The system of class examinations so widespread in the
Scottish Universities is based on the lecture system. With the lecture system, the
staff have very little contact with students and do not know how they arc progressing.
The class examination at the end of each term provides them with some sort of guide
as to how students are getting on.We believe that if the number of tutorials is increased,
it will be possible for staff to know how students are progressing and the need for
class examinations will, in the main, fall away. Class examinations at present are often
the driving force behind students working. A driving force must be kept in existence
and essays and tutorials should be used.

We feel that there is a use for class examinations in first year subjects as they will
give an opportunity for practice in examination technique and cause the student to
discipline the mind by collecting and co-relating his thoughts. Much of the value of
class examination is lost at the moment because the student is, in most cases, only
informed of his mark. His script is not, in many cases, returned to him and ho is not
invited to discuss his paper with the lecturers. We feel this facility should be readily
available. We would thus like to see class examinations abolished except in the first
year where two exams could serve the above purpose.

CONCLUSIONS

23. The above comments of the Union are those arising from some consideration being
given to teaching methods at a meeting of representatives of Student Representative
Councils throughout Scotland. They show that student opinion is by no means satisfied
with the present teaching methods, and that students feel that they could, if otii-
suggestions are accepted, get far more out of their University Education.

138

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX V

COMMITTEE ON UNIVERSITY TEACHING METHODS
Inquiry A — Introduction to University

Questions about their introduction to university work to be answered by a sample of
first-year undergraduates entering first-degree courses, or courses of equivalent
standard, being courses of not less than three nor more than five years, in any subject
except medicine, dentistry and veterinary science.

OCTOBER 1961

Questions should be answered (except where otherwise indicated) by ringing the
appropriate number in the space in the right-hand margin. Help and explanation from
an interviewer will be available.

1. Surname Initials

2. Reference number

3. Age on 1 October 1961 : Under 19 1

19 but not over 20 2

20 but not over 25 3

25 or over 4

4. Sex Male 1

Female 2

5. Is your home within the United Kingdom? 1

elsewhere in the Commonwealth? 2

elsewhere outside the Commonwealth? 3

6. Have you previously been a university student? Yes 1

No 2

7. Are you, in the current term, beginning to study any subject(s) which you

had not previously studied? Yes 1

No 2

8. (a) Were you at a school in the UK. at any time during the twelve months

before you entered the university? Yes 1

No 2

(b) If ‘yes’ to (a) did you there receive any instruction or advice on the nature
of university work and, generally, on how to be a university student?

Yes 1

No 2

139

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

(i) a member or members of the school staff?

(ii) a member or members of the staff of
a university visiting the school for the purpose?

(iii) other persons? (specify)

(Note: (i), (ii) and (iii) are not necessarily mutually exclusive.)

(d) If ‘No’ to (a), did you spend all or part of the twelve months:

(i) as a university student?

(ii) in other full-time education?

(iii) in employment?

(iv) otherwise?

(again, not mutually exclusive.)

9. (a) Were you offered an opportunity to come to the University before
formal enrolment in order to receive instruction or advice on any
matters referred to in 8(b) above? Yes

(b) If ‘Yes’ to (a), did you take it? Yes

(i) students?

(ii) university teachers?

(iii) university librarian?

(iv) others? (specify)

10. Did you receive, before formal enrolment, any instruction or advice not
already covered in your answers to questions 8 and 9, on any matters
referred to in 8(b) from or on behalf of any authority or organisation?

No advice
British Council
Local Education Authority
Government
Other (specify)

11. (a) Were you offered, after formal enrolment, any advice or organised
instruction on any matter referred to in 8(b)? Yes

(Casual advice from individual fellow students should not be included.)

140

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

(b) If ‘yes’, was it from:

(i) students?

(ii) university teachers?

(iii) university librarians?

(iv) others? (specify)

12 .

(a) Is there a person to whom you have been told to go at regular intervals
and from whom you could seek advice on matters referred to in (8b)?

Yes

(b) If not, have you been told to whom to go for such advice if you need it?

Yes

(c)

If ‘no’ to (a) and (b) do you think you know to whom in the University,
other than a fellow student, you could go for such advice? Yes

13. (a) In your view, was instruction or guidance on any of the matters referred
to in 8(b) necessary for you? Yes

(b) If ‘yes’ to (a) did you get instruction or guidance? Yes

141

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX VI

INQUIRY A— INTRODUCTION TO UNIVERSITY

NOTE CIRCULATED TO UNIVERSITIES

1. A sample of 1,133 first-year undergraduate students entering courses of three to
five years in subjects other than medicine, dentistry, or veterinary science, was used
for this inquiry, and returns were received from 1,061 (94 per cent). Of those who
completed forms 70 per cent were men and 30 per cent were women. According to
the annual returns of the U.G.C., the proportions of men and women among first-year
undergraduates entering in 1 959—60 the faculties with which the Committee is concci ned
were 74 : 26.

2. Of the men completing forms 53 per cent were under 19 and 86 per cent were
under 20 on 1st October, 1961. Among the women the corresponding percentages
were 64 and 94. The higher average age of men is to a small extent due to the higher
age of students from homes outside the United Kingdom (7 per cent of the men and
3 per cent of the women). If such students are eliminated, the proportions of men
under 19 and under 20 respectively rise to 55 per cent and 88 per cent, but the
proportions of women under those ages are not affected.

3. The main object of the inquiry was to ascertain whether new students obtained
‘instruction or advice on the nature of university work, and generally on how to be a
university student’; how they obtained this advice, if they did obtain it; whether they
had anyone to go to for it; and whether they felt the need for it. The inquiry was
conducted by interview, and the following instruction was given to interviewers as
to how the words in inverted commas were to be construed;

‘The Committee are concerned with the academic progress of the student,
rather than with his social and personal life, though they recognise that the two
cannot be wholly dissociated. Advice on social and personal life in a new
environment (Hamlet, Act I, Scene 3, 11. 55-81) would not justify an affirmative
answer to this question unless it included some advice on academic matters, such
as the differences between School and University work, methods of study at a
University, etc. On the other hand, the receipt of a detailed syllabus of the course
which the student proposes to undertake, even if accompanied by a list of books
to be read, is not by itself to be regarded as “instruction or advice”. The Committee
assume that the student will receive at the right time full information as to the
content of his course; what they are concerned with is whether he receives sufficient
advice on how to set about the course, and how that advice is administered’.

In the rest of this note the word ‘advice’ should be read as meaning instruction or advice
of this kind.

4. The need of a student for advice may be greater if he has not been at a university
before and if he is beginning to study a subject which he has not previously studied.
Of the students who responded, 96 per cent — or 97 per cent if overseas students are
eliminated — had not previously been university students; and 57 per cent were
beginning to study a subject which they had not previously studied, the differences in
this last respect between men and women, and between home and overseas students,
being insignificant.

5. Students with homes in the United Kingdom may obtain advice at school, but a
significant proportion of such students (19 per cent of the men and 15 per cent of the
women) were not at school in the United Kingdom during the year preceding their

142

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

entry to the university. Of those who were not at school, most of the men and about
half the women were in full-time employment. Of students who came from the United
Kingdom and were at school there during the previous year, 47 per cent of the men and
62 per cent of the women received advice at school. The great majority of them received
it from school staff; only 21 per cent of the men and 4 per cent of the women received
it from university staff visiting the school for the purpose.

6. Students were asked whether they got advice before enrolment, other than advice
given at school, or advice given at the university immediately before enrolment. Of
those with homes in the United Kingdom 8^ per cent received advice, which for
4^ per cent came from the Local Education Authority. Of the 29 students from overseas
who were not at school in the United Kingdom, 11 received advice from the British
Council.

7. It is evident that universities find it most convenient to defer the giving of advice
until students are about to enter upon their courses, and in view of the wide area from
which most universities draw their students it is natural that they should do so. In
some cases new students are invited, normally through the Students’ Union, to come
up to the university for advice before enrolment, an arrangement for which the U.G.C.,
in their report of 1958, said that they had ‘nothing but praise’. Of all who responded,
49 per cent said that they had been offered an opportunity to come to the university
before formal enrolment in order to receive advice. This proportion varied widely
between universities of different groups, as shown in the following table:

Percentage offered advice
before enrolment

Oxford and Cambridge

London

Larger English universities*

Smaller English universitiesf

Wales

Scotland

That such an opportunity is valued is shown by the fact that it was taken by

88 per cent of those to whom it was offered. Those who obtained advice imder these
arrangements were asked from what source or sources (not mutually exclusive) they
received it. Students were given as a source by 74 per cent of those who took advantage
of these arrangements, university teachers by 77 per cent, university librarians by
35 per cent, and other persons (mainly university officers and chaplains) by 19 per cent.

9. The proportion of students who said that they received advice after enrolment
was 52 per cent. This proportion does not vary so greatly between types of university
as in the case of advice before enrolment, being lowest at Oxford and Cambridge
(45 per cent) and highest at the smaller English universities (68 per cent) and at the
Colleges of the University of Wales (59 per cent). As might be expected, university
teachers were the main source of advice (88 per cent), students, university librarians,
and others, being given as a source by 18, 15, and 10 percent respectively. (Students
were asked, in answering this question, to take no account of casual advice received
from individual fellow students.)

10. Students were asked (a) whether there was a person to whom they had been told
to go at regular intervals and from whom they could seek advice, and (i>) if not,
whether they had been told to whom to go for advice if they needed it. Those who

* Birmingham, Bristol, King’s College, Newcastle, Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester (including
the College of Science and Technology), Nottingham and Sheffield.

t Durham Colleges, Exeter, Hull, Keele, Leicester, Reading, Southampton.

143

(90678) K

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

answered ‘yes’ to question (a) were 60 per cent of those responding, and those who
answered ‘no’ to (a) and ‘yes’ to (b) were 31 per cent, leaving 9 per cent who answered
‘no’ to both. The variations in these proportions between university groups are shown

‘vcs’ to (a) ‘no

to (a) 'no'

to both

‘yes^ to (b)

Oxford and Cambridge

London

Larger English universities . ■

Smaller English universities . .

Wales

Scotland

A further part of this question (12) appears to have been widely misoonstroed,

and the

replies to that part are not therefore regarded as significant.

11. Finally, each student in the sample was asked

(а) whether, in his view, advice was necessary for him;

(б) whether, if it was, he got it.

Of the replies to (a), 66 per cent were ‘yes’. At Oxford and Cambridge this percentage
fell to 48, but in other types of university the variations in it were not large, and not
significant, the range being between 72 per cent (Scotland) and 66 per cent (laiger
English universities). Of those who answered ‘yes’ to question (n), 28 per cent (i.e.,
19 per cent of all who responded) answered ‘no’ to question (/>). The variations in
this percentage between different types of university are considerable. The variations
are given in the following table:

Number of
valid
responses

University Group

Negative replies to {b)

As a percentage
of those who
replied ‘yes’ to (a)

As a percentage
of all valid
responses

182

Oxford and Cambridge . .

161

London

336

Larger English universities

136

Smaller English universities

Wales

162

Scotland

It is worth remarking that a certain number of forms in which question (h) was answered
‘yes’ were annotated with criticism of the quality of the advice received. Thus the area
of dissatisfaction must be regarded as somewhat larger than the percentages in the
above table would indicate.

September, 1962.

144

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX VII

MAIN STUDENT SURVEY

Relevant questions extracted from questionnaire issued jointly with the Committee
Higher Education.

PART I

25. you, in the current term, officially allocated to someone whose function

it is to organise your course of studies, or advise you on it? (e.g. a tutor
supervisor, regent, or director of studies) Yes

If ‘yes’: How often do you usually have a period with him, or her?

approximately once or more often a week
approximately once a fortnight
less often than once a fortnight

26. Aue you, in the current term, officially allocated to someone who is available

to advise you on personal problems? (whether or not he or she organises
your course of studies or advises you on it?) Yes

27. If no to questions 25 and 26: Do you receive advice on your course of

studies in some other way (e.g, from the department concerned with the
subject)? Yes

If ‘yes’: In what way do you receive advice on your course of studies?

from department concerned with subject
other way (describe)

28. In the last week have you spoken with any member of the academic staff,

other than in periods of formal instruction and excluding casual remarks
and brief greetings? Yes

29. Apart from examinations, do you submit written work, done wholly or

mainly in your own time and not during supervised classes, for criticism
and for correction? Yes

If ‘yes’: Do you normally submit some written work:

approximately once or more often a week?

approximately once a fortnight?
less often than once a fortnight?

(Written work includes all kinds of written work, i.e. it includes translations
from one language to another, mathematical exercises, and the writing-up
of practical or field work, and not only essays.)

145

( 90678 )

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

t=)

^ ft

.a <0

^ o
d

••-I c/3

-5 'Cl
)_ O '-7

^ S'g

•^1 ^

S O W3

^ &3

S ^

S d ^

4J U 4J

I'I'a

(D '

.S ^

2 a> Q

•■^ a>

*0 >* d

d rO

a T3 S

s ci s

“I'g

•s j^:

>»

■g

"8 3^

Q u a

2 ’■? 9

? s 8

a ft “ -

•d >, Mit^-a s
^ -a ,fl O

S “ 1 -ft S '■? f

^ a I a ^ i g

B- ? r -2 ^ 1 1

I a> >
g-a

ft g ^ .2 ^ i a

S -S £r t; -fl S >2
o S '3 o ^ a a
oft a n g: -ft -o
o 3 S & d “

ll^ili

a ! ^ HI

.a I

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Would you please write your name and present address whilst at umversity in the box on the right in
case any details in your record need clarification.

iri '«or^odo\o '-!r4 mrt-'nyD

g si

-2|&i y

ns ID n a -c

- .a « 2

” I !§
S'l-s^

8 1 s S'

2 ,o o cti

i S ^ ^

I o

lilll

2 « S( S

147

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 1. Record of Instruction Periods

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Table 2. Record of Private Study

a ja

y ^
i5

3 ^
O -c

^ 0
d «
o a

V3 ^

■P

3 S
'2 1=1

1 .a
i-s

3 2

3 3

1°
^ *o
o o

3 ’S

2 S,

' Ui
X)

d ^

3 I

O ^

S °a

■B,!^

M "2

^ S g,

: a »
8 6
. “ e

• M 9

.9 S

^ .i
'^1

■’I' I

"g^S

s’ ra K

>> cl d .g g

i-s

S g

■3 S

c o

„ a

a ^
s s

s <J

s s
^ 'B
.a«

o ^

g-S

■p. I

^ §
^.a

149

s’a

O d

•3

^ 42

■ c ^ '3

: § S i i :

ja . ® .

■w M ui cm

:lt-T

• T3 u >^j a> cj

.2 d ,2 3 1 )
C a C Q..S2
i> <i? w tt? o

I ? 3. ^ ft 3

d _ d ^ X

o o o c> u

“■g

S .a •« .2 .

.©

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Would like increase in number of discussion periods . .
Would not like increase in number of discussion periods

APPENDIX Vin

TEACHERS’ SURVEY

Relevant questions extracted from a questionnaire issued jointly
with the Committee on Higher Education

PREAMBLE

This questionnairs is issued jointly by the Committee on Higher Education (The
Robbins Committee) and the Committee on University Teaching Methods (The Hale
Committee). The questions in Part I concern both Committees. Those in Part II,
relating chiefly to the past careers of university staff, are asked in order to provide
the Robbins Committee with broad information on the structure of the profession
and the pattern of recruitment. Those in Part III deal with university teaching methods
and practices and cognate matters. No information relating to an individual will be
communicated to anybody by the organisation which is being employed to conduct
the survey. Each Committee will, however, make available to the other the summarised
information obtained from the Part for which each is primarily responsible, so far
as the other Committee requires it for reporting on its reference. Subject to this, the
information given will be treated as strictly confidential and will be used only to arrive
at aggregates and averages.

The questionnaire is being put to a sample of full-time University academic staff.
The Hale Committee is concerned solely with undergraduate teaching, and the fields
of medicine, dentistry and veterinary science are excluded from its terms of reference.
The Robbins Committee is subject to no such restrictions. Parts I and II of the
questionnaire therefore fall to be answered by all in the sample. Part III is issued
only to teachers in the fields or areas which are inside the Hale Committee’s interests.

This questionnaire is not the only means by which the Committees are obtaining
information, and answers to questions which it omits may be being sought in other
ways. The questions are questions partly of fact and partly of opinion. The latter,
like the former, have been so expressed as to admit of answers which could conveniently
be machine-tabulated. It is realised, however, that a categorical answer to soine of
the questions may not be found easy to give. Statements relating to any of the questions,
if appended to the completed questionnaire, would be welcomed, but it is hoped that
even where this is done, an answer will also be given to the question as put.

Consistency of terminology is essential, and to this end a series of definitions is
attached as Appendix B. It is particularly requested that the definitions of the various
kinds of teaching period shall be strictly adhered to, even if this means using a terra
in an unfamiliar sense. Unless this is done, the statistical validity of the results of the
survey may be prejudiced. For certain purposes subjects have had to be listed in groups,
and this listing is attached as Appendix A.

The questioimaire should be answered for the two weeks commencing the 18 th
February, and concluding on 3rd March, 1962.

150

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

PART I

For Parts I and II of this questionnaire please write in your answers or tick against
the category shown.

For Part III, if enclosed, please ring the Code Numbers or letters shown against your
answers, except where you are asked to write in your answer.

Serial Number:

1. Name

2. University

3. Sex:

Male

Female

4. Age at the 31st December, 1961 :

5. Marital Status :

Single

Married with children
Married without children

6. Post held:

(fl) Professor

{b) Reader

(d) Lecturer (or college fellow of not less than three years standing not being

Research Fellow)

(/) Demonstrator

(g) Research post

(A) Other post

(Write in)

7. Are you head or chairman of a department?

Yes

8. In which Faculty do you primarily work?

9. In which department to you primarily work? (Write in where applicable)

151

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

10. What is your main subject? • ■ • •

(See Appendix A attached and write in the Number shown against your subject.
If your subject is not listed please write in the name of your subject.)

11. After considering the categories set out in this question, and their definitions in
Appendix B, please state:

In the fortnight from 18th February to 3rd March, the number of hours you have
spent approximately on the following types of work?

A. Teaching — Appendix B

Undergraduate

Postgraduate

Undergraduate
and Postgraduate

(a) Lectures

(b) Discussion periods

{d) Practicals

(e) Field periods

(/) Preparation for (a) to (e)
(see Note * below)

(^) Correcting written work
other than examination
questions or written work
disposed of in the presence
of students

* NOTE under A(/) long term preparation for future teaching, such as reading or
research that may fructify in a future course of lectures, should not be included.

Hours

B. Other Teaching

(a) Extra mural

(b) Other (i.e. non-University)

C. Advice to and consultation with students in an official capacity

on personal problems ■ ■ ■ . ■ ■ • ■ • ■ • ■

D. Meetings of learned societies and conferences, including those
organised on a faculty or departmental basis (please include all
such meetings whether or not students were present, provided

they did not form part of a course of regular instruction)

E. Examining (including setting, invigilating, oral, marking, etc.)

F. Research (e.g. work undertaken mainly with the possibility of
publication in mind)

152

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

G. Other private study connected with your work

H. Administration of University/College/Departmental affairs
including Committees, interviews, official correspondence

J. Other professional work

(i) outside the University

(a) acting as a consultant

(A) external Committees, or administration

(ii) within the University

12. In the fortnight from 18th Fchrnary to 3rd March, how many lionrs which could

otherwise have been devoted to activities recorded in Q. 11 did you spend in travel
in connection with those activities?

13. Was this fortnight fairly typical of your working programme this term?

Yes

14. If you were to aggregate your working time in the last three vacations, what
percentage (approximately) would you estimate that you spent on the following
activities:

(Definitions as in Question 1 1)

. „ . . . Percentage

A. Teaching (7A (o) to (g) above

Undergraduate

Graduate . . . . . . . .

Undergraduates and Postgraduates

B. Other Teaching (including Extra-mural)

C. Advice to and consultation with students in an official capacity

on personal problems

D. Meetings of learned societies and conferences including those

organised on a faculty or departmental basis

E. Examining . . . . . . . .

F. Research

G. Other private study

H. Administration of University/Collcge/Departmental affairs

J. Other professional work :

(a) Outside University

(h) Inside University

153

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

15. (a) How many classes of the following types did yon instruct In the fortnight from
18th February to 3rd March? (The number of teachers to be counted as present
should include only those actively engaged in instructing students in the class).

Number of Students per Teacher

5-9

10-19

20-100

Over 100

Type of class:

Lecture

Written exercise classes. .

Practical classes

(6) At what proportion of practical classes was more than one teacher present?

None

One quarter

One half

Three quarters

All

16. (a) Did you give any tutorials during the fortnight?

(Defined as in Appendix B)

Yes

(6) If the answer to (a) is ‘Yes’ state the number attended by:

No. attending

One student . .

Two students . .

Three students

Four students . .

One hour or less

Over one hour

17. (n) Have you taken part in seminars with students during the present term?

Yes

154

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

{b) If yes to (a) state of the last seminar meeting the numbers present of the types
mentioned below:

Other members
of staff

Undergraduates

Postgraduates

None . .

One

2-4

5-9

10 or over

Part II consisted of questions asked by the Committee on Higher Education, and is
therefore not included here.

PART in

N.B. In this part of the questionnaire, ‘student’ means ‘undergraduate’ student;
and only teaching given to undergraduate students should be included or dealt with
in your answers, unless there is a specific indication otherwise.

20. In the last lecture you gave, did you:

Write on a blackboard?

Most of the lecture

A summary or part of it

Figures, diagrams, formulae or phrases only . .
None of tlie lecture

Dictate?

Most of the lecture

A summary or part of it

Figures, diagrams, formulae or phrases only . .
None of the lecture

(18)

(19)

155

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Project on a Screen?

(20)

Most of the lecture

A summary or part of it

Figures, diagrams, formulae or phrases only

None of the lecture

21. A. Do you give out printed or duplicated notes, summaries of lectures, or guides
for further study in connection with your lecture courses?

Regularly

(21)

Sometimes

Never

B. Would you like to do it, or^do it more, if secretarial help were available?

Yes

(22)

22. A. Do you regularly set students for whom you have teaching responsibility written
work to be done in their own time for correction or criticism?

To none . .
To some . .
To most . .
To all . .

B. If ‘Yes’ at all to A, does the student normally:

(i) Give in the work for you to read? •• •• •• 5

(ii) Submit the work to a tutorial or seminar and have it

discussed? 6

156

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

C. If ‘Yes’ to B (i), do you normally;

(i) Return it with written correction or criticism, but without
oral discussion? . . . .

(ii) Discuss it orally with the student? 8

(iii) Both . . . . . . . . 9

23. Considering tlieir courses as a whole, and not only the teaching they receive from
you, do you think that students in whose teaching you take part get too much, flie
right amount, or not enough of the kinds of teaching mentioned in the left-hand
column of the table below?

More than one reason may apply.

Kind of

Too much, due to
shortage of:

Not enough, due to
shortage of:

leaching to:

Books

Staff

Other

things

About

right

Staff

Accom-

modation

Other

things

SpcciaUscd

Studvntx*

Lectures

(24)

Other teaching

3 ,

(25)

Nan Specialised
Students
Lectures

(26)

Other teaching

(27)

* As a general guide, a student’s course should be regarded as specialised if the scope
of his studies, apart from any subsidiary subjects, does not extend beyond the scope of
one academic department.

24. If more books were available to students would it be desirable to reduce the time
given to any, and if so, which, of the types of teaching mentioned below?

Lectures

Tutorials and seminars

Written exercise and practical field periods

Written work in own time

157

'(28)

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

25. A. Have you a room for your exclusive use which is at your disposal at ail times?

(29)

B. If ‘Yes’ to A above, how many students can you conveniently teach in it?

C. If ‘No’ to A above, do you teach small numhers of students:
In a room which you share with another/others

In a room engaged for the purpose?

Not at all?

None

1-4

5 or more

D. Do you consider that teaching in your department is handicapped in any way
by deficiencies of accommodation and if so, in which of the following ways?

Not

handicapped

Handicapped by

Types of Room

Not

enough

rooms

Rooms
too small

Rooms

otherwise

unsatisfactory*

Lecture

(30)

Tutorial or seminar

(31)

Written exercise classes

(32)

Laboratories, drawing
office, etc.

(33)

• To include references to acoustics, ventilation, etc.

26.

How much time have you spent in the fortnight from 18th February to 3rd March
repeating teaching of any kind which it would not have been necessary to repeat,
but for a shortage of staff or accommodation?

None

Less than 2 hours . .
From 2 to 5 hours . .
Over 5 hours

(34)

158

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

27. A. Have you adequate secretarial assistance?

Yes

Have you adequate technical assistance?

(35)

Yes

Not applicable

(36)

B. If you have inadequate help of these kinds, what proportion of your working
time could have been saved had the help been adequate?

With Secretarial Assistance Less than A . .

A to ^

Over i

With Technical Assistance Less than A . .

A to i
Over i

(37)

(38)

28.

Are you interested in using visual aids (other than the blackboard) in the course
of your teaching?

(39)

B. If ‘Yes’ to A above, please answer the questions in the tables below :

Films and
Film Strips

Charts and
Diagrams

Other

Material

Are you:
Interested?

(40)

Not interested though applicable
to subject?

(41)

Not interested — inapplicable to
subject?

(42)

159

(90678) L

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

C. If you are interested in any visual aids, is the supply:
Adequate in quality?

Adequate in quantity?

D. Is its use limited by lack of apparatus?
(Projectors, etc.)

29. A. Do you use sound recorded material?

(N.B. Sound film belongs to Q. 28. B)

B. If ‘No’ to A above, is this because of:
Inadequate quality of material available?

Inadequate quantity of material available?

Lack of apparatus?

Unsuitability of subject for this technique

Absence of interest on your part in this technique

160

Yes

(43)

Yes

(44)

Yes

(45)

Yes

(46)

Yes

...

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

30. Which of the following categories of students are you teaching this term?

First Year . .
Final Year . .
Other Years

(47)

31.

In your view, are the students whom yon teach given sufficient guidance on the work
in your subject which they should do on their own?

Specialist Students :

Non-Specialist Students:

Yes

Yes 3

No 4

32.

A. Arc your students given a programme of reading or other work on their subject
to be done in vacations?

(49)

B. Would it be both desirable and practicable to get students to do more academic
work in vacations?

Yes

(50)

(ii) During this and other vacations: Yes 3

No 4

Exhortation

Increasing availability of university premises (libraries,
laboratories, etc.) in vacations

Making it easier for students to borrow books for reading
in vacation away from University premises . .

161

(51)

(90678) L 2

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Promoting more travel, field work, or reading parties:

With teacher participation

Without teacher participation

Offering teaching in vacation at the University:

In the form of a long-vacation course

In some less formal way

Setting exercises to be done in vacation

Setting books to be read in vacation

Examining at beginning of term on reading set for vacation

Other methods (Please write in as well as ringing code
number) . .

33. During the present term, how many extra-curricular lectures open to undergraduates
(See Appendix B) have you delivered, or will you be delivering?

None

(52)

1 to 3

4 or more

34. A. Have you completed a course of training as a teacher:

(i) At a university department of education?

(53)

(ii) At a training college for teachers?

(iii) Elsewhere?

(iv) No course completed

B. If ‘Yes’ to A. (i), (ii), or (iii) above, has such training been a definite advantage
tn von as a university teacher?

Yes

(54)

162

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

C. Have you ever had any other training in methods or instruction fe.g. in the
Services)?

(55)

35. A. Have you ever had any instruction or guidance on the teaching of university
students?

Yes

(56)

B. Do you think that newly appointed university teachers should receive some form
of organised instruction or guidance on how to teach?

Yes

(57)

Have you ever checked on the efficiency of your lecturing technique, e.g. by recording
a lecture, inviting criticism, and so on?

Yes

(58)

A. Will you take part in 1962, officially or unofficially, in the degree examinations
in your university?

Yes

(59)

B. If ‘Yes’ to A above, will it be :

(0 by setting questions only?

(ii) By marking scripts only? . .

(iii) Both (i) and (ii)?

A. Have you past experience of setting questions for degree examinations?

Yes

(60)

163

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

B. If so, to what extent is your knowledge of the content of the actual courses
siven’a determining factor in your choice of questions?

Major factor

Minor factor

Not a factor

Do you consider that in your subject the existing system of written examinations is

(i) Of providing an incentive to students to work hard : Yes

(61)

(ii) Of assessing undergraduate quality:

Yes

40. Disregarding admission or entrance scholarship examinations, do you habitually
help to conduct departmental or college examinations, or tests, which are not a
formal requirement of the university:

Annually
Twice a year
More often . .
Not at all

(62)

41 . If you answer any part of Question 39 in the aiflrmative, do you :

(i) Retnrn the corrected papers to the students?

(63)

(ii) Go through the pajwrs with the students who have worked
them?

(iii) Neither

42. A. In your opinion, do students whom you teach have to sit examinations :

(i) Too often?

(64)

(ii) With about the right frequency?

(iii) Not often enough? ..

164

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

B. Do you consider that the examinations taken by your students have an influence
on the teaching in your subject which is:

Good?
Neutral? .
Bad?

C, If you have answered ‘Bad’ in B above, do you consider that the situation could
be remedied?

(65)

43. A. Are you resident in college or hall?

undertaken to he available to students for consultation?

Yes

(66)

Yes

(67)

week when you have

Yes

(68)

C. If ‘Yes’ to B above, do these times amount to an average weekly aggregate of:

Less than 1 hour

(69)

1 hour but less than 2 hours

2 hours but less than 3 hours

3 hours or more

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ON ALL CARDS PUNCH
POS. B. on COL. 80

165

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX A

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF SUBJECTS

Subject

Accountancy
Administration
Aeronautical engineering
Aesthetics • ■
Agricultural botany
Agricultural chemistry
Agricultural economics
Agricultural sciences
Agricultural zoology
Agriculture • .

Anatomy
Ancient history
Anglo-Saxon
Animal nutrition . .
Animal production
Anthropology
Applied chemistry*
Applied geochemistry
Applied geophysics
Applied mathematics
Applied mechanics ■ .
Applied physics
Arabic

Archaeology. .
Architecture
Archive Administration
Assyriology • .
Astronomy • .

Bacteriology
Biochemistry
Biological chemistry
Biology

Biometry

Biophysics . .

Botany

Building

* Omission

Applied Biochemistry

Subject

Number

Celtic

11-13

—

as applic.

Ceramics

Ceylonese

11-13

as applic.

Chemical engineering

Chemical pathology

Chemical technology

Chemistry

. 34

Chinese

11-13

as applic.

Civic design

Civil engineering . .

Classics

6 and 8

Clinical chemistry . .

Clinical psychology. .

Colloid science

Colour chemistry . .

Commerce - .

Comparative philology

Criminology

Crystallography

11-13

as applic. p

35-39
as applic.

35-39
as applic.
38
52

Dairying

Demography

Divinity

Drama

Dutch

11-13

Dyeing

as applic.
54

Economic history . .

Economic science . .

Economics . .

Education . .

Egyptology . .

Electrical engineering

Electron physics

Electronic engineering

Electronics . .

Engineering . .

44-49

as applic.

166

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Subject

E (contd.)

Engineering geology

English

Entomology

Environmental engineering

Epistemology

Estate management. .

Ethics

Experimental pathology .
Experimental psychology .

Fine Art

Fish technology
Fluid mechanics
Food science

Forestry

French

Fuel technology

Gas engineering
General engineering

Genetics

Geochemistry

Geodesy

Geography

Geology

Geophysical prospecting .
Geophysics . .

German

Glass technology • .
Government
Greek (classical)

Greek (modern)

Hebrew

Hispanic studies

Histology

History

History of Art
History of Science . .
Horticulture
Horticultural botany
Household science . .
Hungarian

Subject

Number

Icelandic

11-13

as applic.

Indian languages . .

11-13

as applic.

Industrial Administration . .

Industrial economics

Industrial management

Industrial metallurgy

Inorganic chemistry

Instrument techniques

International economics . .

International government . .

International history

International politics

International Relations . .

Islamic

11-13
as applic.

Italian

44-49

Japanese

11-13
as applic.

as applic.
37

Jurisprudence

Land economy

Latin

Latin-American Studies . .

7, 10-13

as applic.

Law

Leather manufacture

Librarianship

Linguistics

Literature — classify with the

11-13

appropriate language, e.g.

as applic.

English Literature as 3

Logic

11-13

as applic.

10-13

Malay

11-13

as applic.

Marine biology

Marine engineering

Mathematical physics

Mathematical science

Mathematics

Mechanical engineering . .

Mechanical sciences

11-13

Medical physics

as applic.

Medical statistics . .
167

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Subject

M (contd.)
Mediaeval history
Metallurgy . ■
Metaphysics
Meteorology
Meterology • .
Microbiology
Micropalaeoiitology
Mineral dressing
Mineral technology
Mineralogy ■ •
Mining

Mining economics
Mining engineering
Mining geology
Modern history
Molecular biology
Moral philosophy
Moral science
Morbid anatomy
Music

Mycology ■ •

Naval architecture • •

Nuclear engineering
Numerical analysis . ■

Oceanography
Oil technology
Operational research
Optics

Organic chemistry • •
Oriental and African Studies

Palaeography

Palaeontology

Pali

Paper technology ■ ■

Parasitology

Pathology

Persian

Petroleum production
engineering

Petrology

Pharmaceutical chemistry ■

Pharmaceutics

Pharmacognosy

Subject

Number

i* (contd.)

Pharmacology

Pharmacy ■ ■

Philology

Philosophy . .

Philosophy of Science

Phonetics

Photogrammetry . .

Physical chemistry . ■

Physical metallurgy. •

Physics

Physiology ■ •

Polish

Political Administration

Political Economy ■ .

Political Science

Politics

Portuguese ■ •

Production engineering

Psychology • •

Public Administration

Quantity surveying . .

Radio astronomy • •
Radio biology

11 1'i

Radio chemistry
Refractories . .
Roumanian . ■

asapplic.

Subject

Number

11-13
as applic.
23
22
23

11-13
as applic.
49
27

35-39
as applic.
34
31

11-13
as applic.
9

11-13
as applic.
55
39
41

11-13
as applic.

34
53
53

Sanskrit

Scandinavian Studies

Sciences engineering

Semitics

Slavonic and E. European
Studies

Social Administration
Social Anthropology
Social Psychology ■ ■

11-13
as applic.

44-49
as applic.

11-13
as applic.

11-13
as applic.
24
20
27

168

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Subject

Number

S icontd.')

Social Science

Social Work

Sociology

Soil mechanics

Soil Science . .

Spanish

Statistics

Structural engineering

Surveying . .

• • 18 or 21

or 46

Swedish

11-13
as applic.

Technical chemistry

Technical physics . .

Technical optics

Textile chemistry • •

Textile designs

Subject

Number

T (conid.)

Textile engineering . .

Textile industries . .

Textile technology . .

Theology

Topographical surveying . .

Turkish

11-13
as applic.

Veterinary anatomy

Veterinary pathology

Veterinary physiology

Welsh

11-13
as applic.

Zoology

169

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX B

DEFINITIONS OF TEACHING PERIODS

! Ucture means a teaching period occupied wholly or mainly with contmuous
exposition by the lecturer. Students attending it may be given some opportunity tor
Questions or a little discussion, but in the main they have nothing to do except listen
and take notes. A teaching period which complies both with the definition of a lecture
and with that of a field period (see below) should be recorded as a field period.

2. Discussion Period. This differs from a lecture in requiring much more participation
from the student. E.g., there may be reading and study of a paper by a student;
discussion in which students are meant to take part, of topics introduced by a member
of staff or a student; a member of staff may go through essays or questions prepared
by student(s); there may be discussion of any academic matters or problems on the
initiative of students or staff.

Questions will be found relating to tutorials and seminars. By tutorial is meant a
discussion period at which not more than four students are present and which is one
of a series of such periods, extending for at least a term, in which each period is to be
conducted (barring illness or other unavoidable cause) by the same teacher. By seminar
is meant a discussion period which is not a tutorial.

A discussion period which complies with the definition of a field period (see below)
should be recorded as a field period.

3 Class At a discussion period the participation of the student is, in the main,
participation in a discussion. At a class the student’s main activity is doing an exercise
of some kind In a written-exercise class the exercises, such as mathematical exercises
or translations from one language to another, do not, except incidentahy, involve the
handling of apparatus, instruments or specimens; in a practical class the exercises do
involve such handling, e.g. scientific experiments; dissection of specimens; learning the
use of calculating machines; drawings, plans, diagrams or maps of precision. (A
free-hand sketch in a written exercise would not turn a written-exercise class into a
practical class. Mathematical exercises in which slide rules or calculating machines are
used should be classed as written exercises.)

A class which complies with the definition of field period (see below) should be
recorded as a field period.

4 Field period is a teaching period for the study of material which cannot be brought
into premises normally used for teaching (e.g. live plants or animals; rock formations;
antiquities, works of art). Consequently the period has to be held out of doors or in
premises (e.g. farm buildings; hothouses; courts of law; public museums) which would
not normally be used as a teaching place. Include as time spent on a field period time
taken in travel to its location.

5 An extra-curricular lecture is one which is outside the normal teaching programme
of your department and is primarily, though riot exclusively, intended for students of
other departments and/or for the general public.

170

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

COMMITTEE

HIGHER EDUCATION

COMMITTEE

UNIVERSITY TEACHING METHODS

LORD ROBBINS

SIR EDWARD HALE

We are writing to ask you to be good enough to give certain assistance to the
Committees, of which we are the Chairmen, appointed respectively to review the pattern
of Higher Education in Great Britain and to make a comparative study of university
teaching methods in certain fields of study. The full terms of reference of our Committees
are appended to this letter.

Our Committees have been advised that some of the information which they require
can best be obtained by asking a sample of members of academic staffs of universities
to answer certain questions, which will be found in the enclosed document. As your
name has come up as one of the sample, the Committees will be most grateful if you
will help them by answering these questions.

The questions in Parts I and II of the enclosed document are either the concern
of both Committees or only of the Committee on Higher Education, and should be
answered by every member of the sample whether or not he is currently engaged on
teaching, and in whatever faculty or at whatever level he serves.

Part III of the questionnaire concerns only the Committee on University Teaching
Methods, and should be answered only by those who have some responsibility for
teaching undergraduates engaged on courses in arts or in pure and applied science.

Thus only Parts I and II need be completed if you are wholly occupied in research,
or if your teaching is solely extramural or is given only to graduates (of whatever
subject) and/or to undergraduates studying medicine, dentistry or veterinary science.

We need hardly say that information given in your replies will be treated as strictly
confidential. Where extended replies are offered to questions in Part III, such replies
may be sent by the contractor to the Committee on University Teaching Methods,
but subject to this, neither Committee will receive any information about a particular
individual.

Completed questionnaires will be retained by Attwood Statistics Ltd. This
organisation has undertaken the work of tabulating and analysing the results on behalf
of the two Committees and will supply them with information only in the form of
tables and analyses. No information concerning any individual will be published or
communicated to any other person or body by Attwood Statistics Ltd., except in so
far as extended replies to Part III are communicated to the Committee on University
Teaching Methods.

Completed questionnaires should be returned in the enclosed envelope on the
4th March, 1962, or as soon as possible in the next few days thereafter.

Robbins

Edward Hale

171

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

APPENDIX IX

THE EFFECT OF SIZE OF TUTORIAL GROUP
ON TEACHING EFFICIENCY
T. L. COTTRELL

It has been frequently stated that instruction of students by means of lectures requires
to be supplemented by tutorial instruction in small groups. To do this makes great
demands on the time of university teachers: this means that for niaxitnum teaching
efficiency the groups should be as large as possible without dimimshmg the effect on
the students. Accordingly some experiments were earned out in the Chemistry
Department at Edinburgh University to discover the effect of tutorial group size on
student performance. The results show clearly that in the context of these expei iments
variation in size of tutorial group from three students to 24 had no significant effect
on the examination performance of the students and groups of 12 actually did slightly
(but not significantly) better than groups of three.

The experiment took place over two years. The range of group size investigated in
the first year of the experiment was from three to 24 students. A lower limit of three
was fixed because this was the smallest number which could possibly be achieved with
any likely staff-student ratio in the Chemistry Department. An upper limit of 24 was
fixed because it was believed that tutorials with larger groups than this would merely
become additional lectures. The tutors found however that whether or not teaching
in groups of 24 was effective, it was less pleasant than teaching smaller groups, so m
the second year only groups of three and 12 were studied.

The investigation was carried out on the class Chemistry U in 1960-61 and in 1961-62
which consisted of about 140 students each year. The tutorials were in physical
chemistry, on chemical thermodynamics, gas-kinetic theory, and elementary quantum
mechanics, and took place weekly throughout the first term. In the first year of the
experiment all the tutorials were based on problems related to the lecture course.
These were worked out and handed in beforehand by the students. In the second yeai ,
for two of the tutorials the set work was an essay. Seven tutors took part in the
experiment and each group had the same tutor throughout the term. The method of
approach in the tutorial itself was left to the individual tutors.

The evaluation of the students’ work in physical chemistry was based on an
examination, which consisted of 34 short answer questions covering most of the ground
dealt with in the lecture course. The questions were both on matters of fact and simple
problems Short answer questions were chosen to give wide coverage of the course and
also for ease of marking. It was found, however, that in the 1960-61 class,
the correlation coefficient between the mean mark in two short answer papers and the
mark in the physical chemistry paper in the degree examination, which was of the
usual essay type, was as high as 0-71. This suggests that the use of essay questions in
the investigation would have given similar results.

In order to show up the effect of group teaching, the examination results had to be
treated in some way to take account of the probable unaided performance of the
student. This was done by calculating a so-called ‘success ratio’, which was the ratio
of the score of an individual student in the short answer test to his average mark in
class examinations in chemistry in the previous year, in which there had been no
tutorial teaching of this sort.

172

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

The results are given in the table below.

Success ratios' in different group sizes

Group size

No. of
groups

Year

Mean ‘Success
Ratio’

Standard error
of mean

1960- 61

1961- 62

1960- 61

1961- 62
1960-61

1-037

1-054

1-063

1-085

0-997

0-040

0-028

0-025

None of the differences between the groups in any year is significant at the 5 per cent
level: the groups of 24 are significantly less effective than the groups of 12 in 1960-61
at tlie 10 per cent level, but they are not more effective than the groups of three. In
each year the group of 12 had the best results. There is clearly no measurable advantage
in reducing the size of the group below 12 students.

The immediate result of this experiment as far as the Chemistry Department is
concerned is that no attempt will be made in future to teach in smaller groups than 12,
but beyond this immediate result it is interesting to speculate briefly on what might at
first sight seem a surprising result. If the main virtues of the tutorial system are that
it encourages regular habits of work, and regular writing about the object of study,
with the actual tutorial discussion of the work playing a relatively minor part, then it
is not surprising that the size of the tutorial group is unimportant. If this is so, the
advantage ol having groups sufficiently small for there to be personal rapport between
tutor and students will be too long-term to be judged by class examinations. Coversa-
tions with students have suggested that this rapport, though it may not produce dir ectly
measurable results, is nevertheless important. The impression gained by tutors is
that this can be achieved as readily in groups of 12 as in groups of three, though some
tutors would be interested to experiment with groups of intermediate size.

Chemistry Department,

University of Edinburgh

5th January,

?ab4 - ,

(90678) Wt. 2418/45 K.48 10/64 Hw.

173

Printed image digitised by the University of Southampton Library Digitisation Unit

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "University teaching methods"

See other formats